Recently, the General Office of the State Council issued the "Opinions on Strictly Regulating Administrative Inspections of Enterprises" (hereinafter referred to as the "Opinions"). On January 7th, the State Council Information Office held a regular briefing on State Council policies to introduce the relevant information of the "Opinions". The 10 measures stipulated in the Opinion are all aimed at addressing prominent issues in administrative inspections that have been strongly reflected by enterprises and the public Vice Minister of Justice Hu Weilie stated that the "Opinions" emphasize the need to govern in accordance with the law, focus on solving prominent problems in administrative inspections related to enterprises, effectively reduce the burden on enterprises, and create a legal business environment for the healthy development of enterprises. To minimize the frequency of entry inspections for enterprises, the "Opinions" have made clear requirements to minimize the frequency of entry inspections for issues such as multiple inspections and repeated inspections that are frequently reported by enterprises, "said Fei Xianghong, spokesperson for the Ministry of Justice and director of the Rule of Law Propaganda Center. Strictly control on-site inspections. Those who are required to implement on-site inspections through written verification, information sharing, intelligent supervision, etc. are not allowed to enter the enterprise. For example, regarding the basic information of the enterprise and whether it has obtained administrative licenses, administrative agencies can obtain it through internal information sharing and other means, so there is no need to go to the enterprise for inspection again. Reasonably choose the inspection method. According to the Opinion, administrative inspections shall be carried out, and those that can be merged and those that can be united shall not be subject to repeated or multiple inspections. The Opinion proposes optimizing inspection methods such as "comprehensive inspection once". For example, in the inspection of the catering industry, law enforcement departments can conduct inspections on whether there is a catering service license, whether there are tableware disinfection facilities, environmental hygiene conditions, and other contents. Establish a graded and classified inspection system. According to the different levels of standardization in enterprise management, the requirements for inspection frequency should also vary, and a one size fits all approach should not be adopted. According to the Opinion, the relevant competent departments of the State Council shall establish a graded and classified inspection system in this field by the end of June this year. Publish the upper limit of annual inspection frequency. At present, some regulatory authorities in certain fields conduct inspections of enterprises too frequently, exceeding reasonable limits, causing enterprises to be exhausted and affecting normal production and operation. According to the Opinion, the relevant regulatory authorities should announce the annual frequency limit for administrative inspections of the same enterprise by the same administrative agency before the end of June this year. "Through this mandatory requirement, we can effectively reduce some unnecessary inspections and lower the burden on enterprises," said Fei Xianghong. The 'Opinions' clearly state that' administrative inspection items that have not been announced shall not be implemented '. Regarding this, Liu Bo, Director of the Administrative Law Enforcement Coordination and Supervision Bureau of the Ministry of Justice, introduced the relevant provisions of the "Opinions". To clean up inspection items and curb disorderly inspections from the source Liu Bo introduced that the relevant authorities should sort out and publicize the inspection items in this field, implement dynamic management of these items, and resolutely clean up any items without legal basis. If the legal basis has changed, it should be adjusted in a timely manner. We must resolutely cancel inspections that have no practical results. Inspection items that have not been announced shall not be implemented. It is reported that regarding the issue of opaque inspection standards reflected by enterprises, the "Opinions" require the relevant competent departments of the State Council to sort out the existing administrative inspection standards in this field and publish them before the end of June 2025. How to solve the problem of inconsistent inspection standards and even conflicts between standards in different fields reported by enterprises? According to the "Opinions", the relevant competent departments should submit to the local government or the higher-level administrative agency for coordination in accordance with regulations, to avoid enterprises being at a loss due to inconsistent standards. In addition, in order to standardize inspection activities, the "Opinions" have made procedural provisions on how to carry out inspections from three aspects, forming a complete institutional loop. According to the Opinion, law enforcement agencies should develop inspection plans and submit them to the responsible person of the unit for approval before conducting inspections. Administrative law enforcement personnel must first issue an inspection notice, present their law enforcement credentials, and make a record during the inspection process. After the inspection is completed, the law enforcement agency should promptly inform the enterprise of the inspection results. The Opinion clarifies the requirements for the subject qualification of administrative inspections of enterprises, and prohibits organizations that do not have the subject qualification from implementing administrative inspections, in response to the widely concerned issue of "who can inspect and who cannot inspect" in society. Regarding the question of "who can conduct inspections", Liu Bo stated that in current legal provisions, only administrative law enforcement agencies, organizations authorized by laws and regulations to manage public affairs, and commissioned organizations can carry out administrative inspections. Furthermore, no organization or individual is allowed to implement it. It is reported that the "Opinions" have put forward further requirements for the inspection subject, and administrative law enforcement agencies must conduct administrative inspections within the scope of their statutory duties; Organizations authorized by laws and regulations to manage public affairs must conduct inspections within the scope of their legal authorization; The entrusted organization must also conduct administrative inspections within the scope of the commission and is not allowed to exceed the scope. Regarding "who cannot conduct inspections", the "Opinions" clearly prohibit four types of entities and personnel from conducting inspections, namely government deliberation and coordination agencies, inspection and testing agencies, research institutes and other third parties, outsourced intermediary agencies, law enforcement auxiliary personnel, grid workers, temporary workers and other personnel who have not obtained law enforcement certificates. The key to implementing the various measures in the Opinion lies in how to grasp the degree of administrative inspection Hu Weilie stated that the "Opinions" aim to curb prominent issues in administrative inspections and create a relaxed development environment for enterprises. However, in areas of concern to the people, such as food and drugs, safety production, etc., especially those related to complaints and reports from the public or issues transferred by relevant departments, inspections should not only be conducted, but also strictly carried out to ensure that inspections can be effective and avoid going through the motions. Hu Weilie also emphasized the need to avoid the tendency of "shirking responsibility" inspections, and to prevent the erroneous concept of "exempting responsibility if inspected and holding accountable if not inspected". "When conducting inspections, we must truly achieve neither overstepping nor being absent, neither interfering with the normal production and operation of enterprises, nor ensuring that necessary inspections can be effectively carried out