Since September 2004, local authorities in Shenzhen, Guangdong Province, have told companies that discharge pollutants illegally to publicly confess their misdeeds through the media and pledge to abide by the laws governing this issue. It is reported that after this policy was adopted, remarkable improvements have been seen in environmental awareness and prevention.

Apart from the "open confession" policy, Shenzhen's Environmental Protection Bureau also sees to it that businesses with poor pollution records don't get bank loans. The Shenzhen Sub-Branch of the People's Bank of China suspended 130 million yuan worth of loans to local companies that flout pollution regulations.

From January to September 2007, a total of 14 companies had made open confessions to the media. The Environmental Protection Bureau said that by connecting business reputations with pollution records, it serves as a reminder to all businesses that there is a high price to pay for not towing the green line.

However, despite the results achieved, Shenzhen's initiative still got tongues wagging across the country, and not all is in favor of the policy.

Some believe that if a company is forced to make confessions without being sincere, it becomes a meaningless procedure. They say combating environmental pollution needs tougher measures.

Moreover, according to the Law on Administrative Punishments, any penalty must have some legal bases, but to force companies to make public confessions is based on local regulations adopted by Shenzhen, not on law. Therefore, without an explicit legal basis, however effective this regulation might be in dealing with pollution, it cannot be sustainable say objectors.

Humiliation immoral

Cao Lin (www.china.com.cn): From the perspective of morality, enterprises do have to shoulder social responsibilities for the public; but in the strict sense, they are only accountable to laws. Therefore, when enterprises breach environment-related laws, punishment from the law is sufficient. The government has the authority to force them to commit to a legal obligation, but it can never force them to fulfill moral responsibilities.

If the government does want businesses to pay for polluting the environment, there are many other choices apart from public confessions. Stringent investigations, administrative punishments and media exposures are effective enough to affect a company's image. However, public confessions are in essence a humiliation of the businesses concerned. This therefore means the government is actually trampling on the rights of the businesses.

By asking businesses to publicly confess, the government is imposing its authority in the same way parents do to their children. However, in a modern society based on democracy, the government is not like a parent, but is in fact an equal, in the legal sense. The government should allow its authority to be expressed within a legal framework, and not just do as it pleases.

Ma Erli (hlj.rednet.cn): It's a common understanding that confessions must be heartfelt and any forced confessions cannot be taken seriously.

Media exposures can never replace administrative punishments, because they will incur no direct loss to polluters, either physically or mentally. An efficient legal procedure should cover fines and pollution surcharges, or even force enterprises to shut down. Only these measures are hard enough to be effective.

Relying on the media to enforce government administration shows the government's incapability to deal with such illegal cases. China boasts a large number of laws targeting environmental pollution. Thus, it's really a pity to give up these laws and pin hopes on the media that have no real administrative power.

Chen Qiang (Modern Express): Government departments are not supposed to act against the law. Irresponsible polluters are despicable, but even so, they only deserve legal punishments. Such punishments as "no bank loans", and "public confessions" have no legal support. Whether the punishing process is just and proper is very important. If the government is allowed to freely punish polluters, maybe tomorrow it will have the right to impinge an individual's legitimate rights and interests.

Ironically, in a survey conducted by sina.com, over 90 percent of the surveyed netizens believe Shenzhen is right in adopting the "public confession" policy. It's not strange for ordinary people to think this way, but it's dangerous for the local government to do whatever it likes.

Liu Haiming (www.sina.com.cn): In the case of pollution discharge, some companies do so despite being fully aware of the damage they will cause. Actually, even before they discharged pollution, not only did they know that pollution would cause damage to the natural environment but they knew it's illegal to do so. But they also believed that the cost of polluting is much lower than that of adopting new technologies to reduce pollution. If pollution incurs much higher costs than pollution treatment, I am sure no companies will be negligent in this regard.

It is said that Shenzhen has seen a decline in pollution discharge. If that is the case, I don't think the result should be attributed to the so-called "public confessions" imposed on polluting businesses, but it's a result of other punishments. For example, without the suspension of bank loans, the confessions alone are unlikely to bring any improvement.

Reputation before profit

Zhou Zhikun (Nanfang Daily): At most, the so-called "public confessions" can only express an apology to the public and promise never to do the wrong thing again. It's not a tough punishment as some people think it to be.

For years, in order to encourage business investment, the Chinese Government has only punished polluters through fines with the ceiling standing at 1 million yuan (nearly $145,000), as long as the pollution incidents are not serious. As a result, companies will not consider adopting new and pollution-free technologies and pollution remains an increasingly thorny problem for the government. However, Shenzhen's practice has found a way to deal with most pollution-related cases, and companies that have polluted, but are not treated as criminals by law, will now face the punishments they deserve.

Besides, although connecting pollution with bank loans seems to have interfered with the independent operation between companies and banks, from a legal perspective, state-owned commercial banks should undertake certain social responsibilities, so it's also their obligation to warn and curb serious polluters. This bank-linked aspect of the policy is helpful in dealing with pollution problems.

Yan Yang (China Economic Times): Society seems unanimous that no mercy should be shown to companies that cause pollution. They must be made to pay a high price for what they have done and only through punishments can we expect the situation to improve. In my opinion, fines, compensation and public confessions should all be included in the punishments.

Punishments in the form of fining and compensation have long been conducted. The current problem is that after polluters are punished and fined, it is the government that gets the money, while the real victims of environmental pollution, local people, can't get any compensation in any form. It's unfair.

To make public confessions is a punishment from the perspective of morality and reputation. To pollute the environment is not only lawless but also immoral. Polluters must be made to feel guilty and apologetic. To achieve this objective, public confessions will prove to be effective and practicable. More importantly, public confessions target involved companies' reputation and image. The public will then get to know which companies are at fault and can consciously resist their products.

Chen Yizhou (www.china.com.cn): The significance of asking companies to make confessions about environmental pollution is that the public is involved in the supervision of follow-up actions. It's not a simple "sorry." Actually, a public confession represents a commitment not only to taking responsibilities but also to updating the environmental protection technologies. Thus, the public will know how to conduct the supervision.

While the awareness of participating in the management of public affairs is increasing in modern society, the government must learn to respect and encourage public supervision so as to make up for the shortage of government management resources, and keep all the environmental action groups under strict supervision.

In the case of environmental pollution, government departments can't do everything themselves, and are certain to come under some pressure. Nevertheless, the participation of the public will help to make the work more efficient. And this is where the objective of "public confession" lies.

Xue Jianguo (Qianjiang Evening News): While the economy is booming, China's environment is made increasingly vulnerable. Against this backdrop, Shenzhen's practice is a good example for the rest of the country.

First, it signals the government's strong decision to combat environmental pollution. For years in many places around China, economic growth was the main priority for local officials. As a result, as long as the local economy was boosted, pollution was not an issue and in some cases even allowed. To deal with environmental protection is the government's responsibility and if it turns a blind eye to pollution, it shows inefficient administration. Through its new initiative the government in Shenzhen is trying to do a good job.

As far as society is concerned, it's absolutely necessary for these companies to make public confessions. Pollution is a public nuisance that harms everyone's interests. While the human-centered spirit is becoming an important topic in Chinese society, the public should have the right to know how polluters are punished and how the pollution is removed.

Generally speaking, a farsighted company always values its reputation and image more than the current profit margin.

Dear Readers, "Forum" is a column that provides a space for varying perspectives on contemporary Chinese society. In each issue, "Forum" will announce the topic for an upcoming issue. We invite you to submit personal viewpoints (in either English or Chinese). Upcoming Topic: Are we really helpless in the fight against sex bribes due to the absence of a legal definition for this crime? E-mail us at byao@cipg.org.cn Please provide your name, telephone number, zip code and address along with your comments. Editor: Yao Bin