论文部分内容阅读
历史的经验反复证明,有权者常常有滥用权力的冲动,相关个人的抵制往往显得苍白无力。只有制度的有效运行,才能产生恒定、长久的约束效力。谈及司法腐败,早些年曾是一个十分忌惮且颇有争议的命题。因为,司法本身是作为腐败的对立面而存在的,二者岂能相容共生?再从深度和广度上说,司法领域里的贪腐现象还是程度有限的,仅仅发生在个别法院和极少数法官身上,能与腐败一词的严重性相提并论?但问题的另一面同样成立。有权力存在的地方,就有腐败发生的可能性。即便是极少数法官的个别贪腐行为,却往往冲击社会道德良知的底线,
Historical experience has repeatedly proved that those in power often have the urge to abuse power, and the boycott of individuals concerned often appears pale and weak. Only the effective operation of the system can produce a constant, long-term binding effect. Talking about judicial corruption was a very dreadful and controversial proposition in earlier years. Because the judiciary itself exists as the antithesis of corruption, how can the two co-exist? In terms of depth and breadth, corruption in the judicial field is still limited to only a few courts and a handful of judges The body can be compared with the gravity of the word corruption, but the other side of the question holds true. Where power exists, there is the possibility of corruption. Even the very few judges’ individual corrupt practices often impact the bottom line of social morality and conscience,