Zhang Ping, former deputy secretary of the Guizhou Provincial Commission for Discipline Inspection and former deputy director of the Provincial Supervision Commission, was arrested

On October 16, the Chinese authorities announced developments in the case involving Zhang Ping, the former deputy secretary of the Guizhou Provincial Discipline Inspection Commission and the former deputy director of the Provincial Supervisory Commission, who is suspected of bribery. The Supreme People’s Procuratorate has designated the Tianjin People’s Procuratorate to handle the case, which has resulted in an arrest decision based on allegations of bribery. The investigation is ongoing.

Zhang Ping, born in August 1964 in Nanzhang, Hubei, has a long history of working within the discipline inspection and supervision system. He became the deputy secretary of the Guizhou Provincial Discipline Inspection Commission in April 2017, and in February 2018, he took on the role of deputy director of the Guizhou Provincial Supervisory Commission. In April of this year, he was officially reported to be under investigation.

On October 7, authorities announced that Zhang Ping had been expelled from the Communist Party and removed from public office due to serious violations of discipline and law. He has been accused of leveraging his official position to benefit others in business operations, project advancements, and career promotions, while unlawfully receiving substantial sums of money.

Additionally, Zhang is alleged to have abused his power, treating the authority granted to him as a means for personal gain, and maintaining close ties with private business owners, thereby engaging in corrupt transactions that severely tarnished the image of discipline inspection and supervisory officials.

Earlier this year, the Central Commission for Discipline Inspection and the National Supervisory Commission reported that 1,569 cases involving discipline inspection and supervisory personnel were initiated in the first half of the year, leading to 2,003 penalties and 268 cases referred to judicial authorities. Their website emphasized the need to “firmly remove bad elements within our ranks” and prevent corruption in supervision, affirming the commitment to properly exercise disciplinary and law enforcement powers.