统计从业资格认定办法
作者:法律资料网 时间:2024-05-26 09:13:46 浏览:8543
来源:法律资料网
统计从业资格认定办法
国家统计局
统计从业资格认定办法
中华人民共和国国家统计局令
第10号
《统计从业资格认定办法》已经2007年4月28日国家统计局第6次局务会议修改通过，现予公布，自2007年6月1日起实施。
局长 谢伏瞻
二OO七年四月三十日
统计从业资格认定办法
（2005年5月16日国家统计局制定
2007年4月28日国家统计局修订）
第一章 总则
第一条 为规范统计从业资格认定工作，提高统计人员的素质，保障统计资料的准确性和及时性，根据《中华人民共和国统计法》、《中华人民共和国行政许可法》和《国务院对确需保留的行政审批项目设定行政许可的决定》，制定本办法。
第二条 在国家机关、社会团体、企业事业单位和其他组织等统计调查对象中承担经常性政府统计调查任务的人员，必须取得统计从业资格，持有统计从业资格证书。
已取得统计员以上统计专业技术职务资格的人员，可免于统计从业资格考试和申请，凭统计专业技术职务资格证书直接从事统计工作。
第三条 国家统计局领导和管理全国的统计从业资格认定工作。
第四条 省级人民政府统计机构是本行政区域内统计从业资格认定工作的实施机关。
第五条 县级人民政府统计机构是本行政区域内统计从业资格认定工作的承办机关。
必要时，省级人民政府统计机构可以决定由设区的市人民政府统计机构承办统计从业资格认定的有关工作。
新疆生产建设兵团统计局负责所属单位的统计从业资格认定工作。
第二章 申请与受理
第六条 具备下列条件的人员，可申请取得统计从业资格：
（一）熟悉统计法律、法规和规章；
（二）坚持原则，具备良好的道德品质；
（三）具备从事统计工作所需的专业知识和技能。
第七条 国家实行统计从业资格考试制度。
统计从业资格考试的时间为每年九月份的第三个星期日。
统计从业资格考试的科目为：统计基础知识与统计实务；统计法基础知识。
第八条 已具备教育行政部门认可的会计与统计核算、统计实务专业大专，统计学类、经济学类、工商管理类专业本科以上学历（或学位）的人员，可免于参加统计基础知识与统计实务科目的考试。
统计学类、经济学类、工商管理类专业以国务院教育主管部门公布的《高等学校本科专业目录（统计用）》为准。
第九条 国家统计局负责编制统计从业资格考试大纲、考试命题、制定考试管理办法和考务规则等工作。
省级人民政府统计机构负责统计从业资格考试考点的设定、试卷的印制、组织阅卷和成绩登记造册等工作。
统计从业资格认定工作承办机关负责统计从业资格考试的报名、考务组织和成绩通知等工作。
第十条 统计从业资格考试应当公开举行。县级以上人民政府统计机构应当事先公布考试的报名条件、报考办法、考试科目以及考试大纲。
第十一条 申请取得统计从业资格的人员，在向统计从业资格认定工作承办机关提出申请时，应当提交下列材料：
（一）《统计从业资格认定申请表》一式两份；
（二）本人有效身份证件及其两份复印件；
（三）统计从业资格考试合格成绩单原件及其两份复印件；
（四）本人近期正面免冠彩色照片一张。
符合本办法第八条规定的人员，在提出统计从业资格认定申请时，除提交前款所规定的材料外，还需同时提交本人学历证书原件及其两份复印件。
第十二条 具备条件的地方，可通过网络受理统计从业资格认定申请，所需材料由省级人民政府统计机构规定。
第十三条 统计从业资格认定工作的承办机关应当将有关统计从业资格认定的依据、条件、程序、期限以及需要提交的全部材料的目录和申请书示范文本等在办公场所公示。
第十四条 申请人申请统计从业资格，应当如实向受理申请的统计从业资格认定工作承办机关提交有关材料。受理机关不得要求申请人提交与其申请的统计从业资格认定事项无关的材料。
第十五条 统计从业资格认定工作的承办机关对申请人提出的申请，应当根据下列情况分别作出处理：
（一）申请人依法不需要取得统计从业资格的，应当即时告知申请人不受理；
（二）申请材料存在可以当场更正的错误的，应当允许申请人当场更正；
（三）申请材料不齐全或者不符合法定形式的，应当当场或者在五日内一次告知申请人需要补正的全部内容，逾期不告知的，自收到申请材料之日起即为受理；
（四）申请材料齐全、符合法定形式，或者申请人按照承办机关的要求提交全部补正申请材料的，应当受理统计从业资格认定申请。
统计从业资格认定工作的承办机关受理或者不予受理统计从业资格认定申请，应当向申请人出具加盖本行政机关专用印章并注明日期的书面凭证。
第三章 审查与决定
第十六条 统计从业资格认定工作的承办机关应当对已受理的申请材料进行审查，并将初步审查意见和全部申请材料自受理之日起二十日内报送省级人民政府统计机构。
省级人民政府统计机构应当自收到初步审查意见和全部申请材料之日起二十日内作出是否授予统计从业资格的决定。二十日内不能作出决定的，经本行政机关负责人批准，可以延长十日，并将延长期限的理由告知申请人。
第十七条 申请人的申请符合法定条件的，省级人民政府统计机构应当依法做出授予统计从业资格的书面决定，并颁发统计从业资格证书。统计从业资格证书应当加盖省级人民政府统计机构印章。
申请人的申请不符合法定条件，省级人民政府统计机构依法作出不授予统计从业资格的书面决定的，应当说明理由，并告知申请人享有依法申请行政复议或者提起行政诉讼的权利。
第四章 证书的使用与管理
第十八条 统计从业资格证书在全国范围内有效。
统计从业资格证书应当依法使用，不得涂改、转让、出租和出借。
第十九条 统计从业资格证书由国家统计局统一设计样式，统一制定编号规则。
省级人民政府统计机构负责统计从业资格证书的印制、编号、颁发和管理工作。
统计从业资格认定工作的承办机关负责本行政区域内统计从业资格证书的送达工作。
第二十条 统计从业资格证书遗失或损坏的，取得统计从业资格的人员可持有效证明，向原承办机关提出补发统计从业资格证书的申请。原承办机关进行审查后，报原发证机关依法予以补发。
第二十一条 对取得统计从业资格的人员，实行统计继续教育。
第二十二条 有下列情形之一的，国家统计局和省级人民政府统计机构可以依法撤销已经授予的统计从业资格：
（一）滥用职权、玩忽职守作出授予统计从业资格决定的；
（二）超越法定职权作出授予统计从业资格决定的；
（三）违反法定程序作出授予统计从业资格决定的；
（四）对不具备申请资格或者不符合法定条件的申请人授予统计从业资格的；
（五）以欺骗、贿赂等不正当手段取得统计从业资格的；
（六）依法可以撤销统计从业资格的其他情形。
因前款所列情形被依法撤销统计从业资格的人员，其已取得的统计从业资格证书应当依法予以收回。
第二十三条 申请人因第二十二条第一款第（五）项原因被撤销统计从业资格的，自撤销之日起两年内，省级人民政府统计机构不得授予统计从业资格。
第二十四条 上级人民政府统计机构应当加强对下级人民政府统计机构实施统计从业资格认定工作的监督检查，及时纠正和处理统计从业资格认定工作中的各种违法行为。
第五章 法律责任
第二十五条 任何单位违反本办法第二条的规定，聘请、任用未取得统计从业资格证书的人员从事统计工作的，由县级以上人民政府统计机构责令限期改正，予以警告或者通报批评。拒不改正的，处一千元以下的罚款。
第二十六条 县级以上地方各级人民政府统计机构违反本办法的规定，有下列情形之一的，由其上级人民政府统计机构责令改正；情节较重的，对直接负责的主管人员和其他直接责任人员依法给予行政处分：
（一）对符合法定条件的统计从业资格申请不予受理的；
（二）对不符合法定条件的申请人授予统计从业资格或者超越法定职权作出授予统计从业资格决定的；
（三）对符合法定条件的申请人不授予统计从业资格或者不在法定期限内作出授予统计从业资格决定的；
（四）法律、法规、规章规定的其他违法行为。
第二十七条 申请人隐瞒有关情况或者提供虚假材料申请统计从业资格的，县级以上地方各级人民政府统计机构不予受理或者不授予统计从业资格，并给予批评教育。
第二十八条 已取得统计从业资格的人员有下列行为之一的，由县级以上人民政府统计机构责令改正，予以警告或者通报批评：
（一）涂改、转让、出租、出借统计从业资格证书的；
（二）向负责监督检查的县级以上人民政府统计机构隐瞒有关情况、提供虚假材料或者拒绝提供情况的；
（三）以欺骗、贿赂等不正当手段取得统计从业资格证书的；
（四）法律、法规、规章规定的其他违法行为。
第六章 附则
第二十九条 在本办法实施前已依法取得《统计证》、《统计上岗证》或《统计上岗资格证书》的人员，应当自本办法实施之日起一年内，到所在地统计从业资格认定工作承办机关换领统计从业资格证书。
第三十条 本办法规定的实施行政许可的期限以工作日计算，不含法定节假日。
第三十一条 本办法自2005年7月1日起施行。国家统计局1998年发布的《统计人员持证上岗暂行规定》同时废止。
任免驻外大使名单（1996年第1期公报）
全国人民代表大会常务委员会
任免驻外大使名单（1996年第1期公报）
中华人民共和国主席江泽民根据全国人民代表大会常务委员会的决定任免下列驻外大使：
1996年1月8日
免去王建邦的中华人民共和国驻阿尔及利亚民主人民共和国特命全权大使职务。
任命李清玉为中华人民共和国驻阿尔及利亚民主人民共和国特命全权大使。
1996年1月23日
免去金永健的中华人民共和国常驻联合国日内瓦办事处和瑞士其他国际组织代表、特命全权大使职务。
任命吴建民为中华人民共和国常驻联合国日内瓦办事处和瑞士其他国际组织代表、特命全权大使。
1996年2月7日
免去吴建民的中华人民共和国驻荷兰王国特命全权大使职务。
任命朱曼黎（女）为中华人民共和国驻荷兰王国特命全权大使。
1996年3月2日
一、免去张沙鹰的中华人民共和国驻墨西哥合众国特命全权大使职务。
任命沈允熬为中华人民共和国驻墨西哥合众国特命全权大使。
二、免去原焘的中华人民共和国驻巴西联邦共和国特命全权大使职务。
任命李国新为中华人民共和国驻巴西联邦共和国特命全权大使。
Expansion of Applicable Sphere: A way to Uniformity
——Compare and Contrast between UNIDROIT and UNCITRAL Conventions
By Dongsheng Lu, Chen Yan
I. Introduction
Financing is paramount for the promotion of commerce. It has been noted that “in developed countries the bulk of corporate wealth is locked up in receivables”. As the economy develops, this wealth increasing is “unlocked by transferring receivables across national borders”. With the prompt and great increases in international trade, receivables financing now plays a more and more important role. Yet under the law of many countries, certain forms of receivables financing are still not recognized. Even transactions are involved in countries where the form of receivables financing is permitted, determining which law governs will be difficult. The disparity among laws of different jurisdiction increases uncertainty in transactions, thus constitutes obstacles to the development of assignments of receivables. To remove such obstacles arising from the uncertainty existing in various legal systems and promote the development of receivables financing cross-boarder, a set of uniform rules in this field is required. The international community has made great efforts in adopting uniform laws. Among those efforts, the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL) drafted, on 12 December, 2001, “United Nations Convention on the Assignment of Receivables in International Trade” (hereinafter referred to as the “UNCITRAL Convention”), with its aim to “establish principles and to adopt rules relating to the assignment of receivables that would create certainty and transparency and promote the modernization of the law relating to assignments of receivables”. UNCITRAL is not the first international organization attempting to resolve the problems associated with receivables. As early as in May 1988, the International Institute for the Unification of Private Law (UNIDROIT) has already adopted a convention known as the “UNIDROIT Convention on International Factoring” (hereinafter referred to as the “UNIDROIT Convention”).
When compare and contrast between the UNIDROIT Convention and the UNCITRAL Convention, one might see a lot of inconsistency in detailed regulations, e.g. sphere of application, relations between parties, priorities, and choice of law, etc. Given the limited space available in this article, the author may only focus on the difference in “sphere of application” of these two conventions, as sphere of application is perhaps the most fundamental issue of a convention.
The purpose of an international convention is to create uniformity in its covered matter, thus the broader a convention’s sphere of application is, the higher could uniformity reach. This article will try to make compare and contrast the sphere of application between the UNIDROIT Convention and the UNCITRAL Convention, illustrate the differences exist between these two conventions, and demonstrate the expansion of sphere of application in the UNCITRAL Convention and its progress on the way to uniformity.
II. Sphere of Application: Subject Matter
As its title indicates, the subject matter of the UNIDROIT Convention is of course international factoring. Article 1(1) says, “this Convention governs factoring contracts and assignments of receivables as described in this Chapter.”
For “factoring contract”, the UNIDROIT Convention provides the following 4 characteristics:
(1) purpose of the contract is to assign receivables;
(2) receivables to be assigned arises from contracts of sale of goods made between the supplier and its customers (debtors), other than those of sale of goods bought primarily for personal, family or household use;
(3) the factor is to perform at least two of the four functions: (i) finance for the supplier; (ii) maintenance of accounts (ledgering) relating to the receivables; (iii) collection of receivables; and (iv) protection against default in payment by debtors;
(4) notice of the assignment of the receivables is to be given to debtors.
As about “assignments of receivables as described in this Chapter”, article 2 (1) describes assignments of receivables as assignment of receivables pursuant to a factoring contract.
Factoring is just a subset of the receivables financing, and perhaps the oldest and most basic one. Besides factoring, receivables financing still entail the following forms,
(1) Forfeiting, similar to factoring, involves the purchase or discounting of documentary receivables (promissory notes, for example) without recourse to the party from whom the receivables are purchased;
(2) Refinancing, also known as secondary financing, involves the subsequent assignment of receivables. In its basic form, one bank or financier will assign to another bank its interest, with the potential for further assignment;
(3) Securitization, in which both marketable (for example, trade receivables) and non-marketable (consumer credit card receivables) asset cash flows are repackaged by a lender and transferred to a lender-controlled company, which will issue securities, sell and then use the proceeds to purchase the receivables;
(4) Project Finance, in which repayment of loans made by banks or financiers to project contractors for the financing of projects are secured through the future revenues of the project.
The first draft of the UNCITRAL Convention has stated to cover factoring, forfeiting, refinancing, securitization and project finance. Somehow, the working group decides that rather than emphasize the form in which the receivables appear, it would instead concentrate on the way in which the receivables might be transferred (contractual or non-contractual) and the purpose of the transaction (for financing or non-financing purposes). It decides the contractual receivables and assignment made to secure financing and other related services would be covered. The non-contractual receivables such as insurance and tort receivables, deposit bank accounts, or claims arising by operation of law seems are not within the ambits of the UNCITRAL convention.
III. Sphere of Application: Special Requirements
Both of the conventions contain a series of requirements. Only when those requirements are satisfied, could the convention be applied. The higher and stricter the requirements are, the smaller the chance to apply the convention is.
a) Internationality requirement
Both the two conventions indicate their sphere of application is of internationality requirement, but the same word in these two conventions has different legal meaning. The internationality requirement of UNIDROIT Convention is exclusively based upon the parties to the underlying contract, i.e. the contract of sale of goods (the supplier and the debtor) having their place of business in different countries. In other words, where the receivables arise from a contract of sale of goods between a supplier and a debtor whose places of business are in the same State, the UNIDROIT Convention could not apply, no matter the following assignment of receivables is to assignee in the same or different State. Thus leaving the international assignment of domestic receivables untouched. The problem, at its simplest, is twofold: first, inconsistency. For instance, in the case where a bulk assignment is made and where part of the receivables are domestic (supplier and debtor are in the same State) and part are international (supplier and debtor are in different State), if the supplier assigns the receivables to a party which is located in another State, the bulk assignment between the same supplier and the same assignee will be governed by two sets of laws and regulations: the portion of international receivables may be governed by the UNIDROIT Convention while the domestic one will be left to the jurisdiction of certain domestic law.
Secondly, leaving the international assignment of domestic receivables to the jurisdiction of various law systems of different States can make “commercial practice uncertain, time-consuming and expensive”. The assignee of receivables from a foreign State may not know which State’s law governs the transaction, and, if the law of the assignor’s State applies, the assignee’s rights would be subject to the vagaries of that foreign law. This no doubt would greatly impede the development of such transaction.
