期刊文献+

中国司法不廉“零容忍”制度构建论——基于法官“经济人”角色之分析

On Construction of "Zero Tolerance" System for Dishonest Judiciary in China——Based on Analysis of Judges’ Role as "Economic Man"
下载PDF
导出
摘要 司法不廉作为中轻程度的司法腐败,是中国司法语境下一个特有的概念。司法不廉"零容忍"指对法官偏离司法公正寻求不当私利的腐败行为,无论不廉洁程度多么轻微,容忍度都必须为零,法官都要被追究责任而绝不放过。司法不廉"零容忍"对于我国司法领域的反腐倡廉而言,具有相当的紧迫性、现实性和必要性。就我国司法不廉"零容忍"制度构建而言,要从"不必为"的职业激励机制、"不能为"的事先防范机制、"不敢为"的事后惩戒机制和"不愿为"的道德自律机制等四方面探索。 Dishonest judiciary, a moderate judicial corruption, is a concept existing specially in the context of the Chinese judicial system. "Zero tolerance to dishonest judiciary" means that there should he no tolerance to corrupt behaviors of judges who deviate from justice and improperly seek for personal interests and that any judges committing such behaviors must be severely punished despite of the severity of the corruption. It is an urgent, practical and necessary task to carry out this system in order to fight corruption. The construction of the "zero tolerance" system for dishonest judiciary shall take "four not's" into account: "do not have to do" (career incentive mechanism), "can not do" (precaution mechanism), "do not dare to do" (punishment mechanism) and "do not want to do" (self-discipline mechanism).
作者 冯一文
出处 《宁波大学学报(人文科学版)》 2012年第1期102-107,共6页 Journal of Ningbo University:Liberal Arts Edition
基金 中国社科院特殊学科项目(社科2009研字136号) 中国博士后科学基金第四十九批面上资助
关键词 司法不廉 “零容忍” 必然性 “四不为”机制 dishonest judiciary zero tolerance necessity mechanism of four not's
  • 相关文献

参考文献2

二级参考文献77

  • 1苏力.复仇与法律——以《赵氏孤儿》为例[J].法学研究,2005,27(1):53-69. 被引量:91
  • 2苏联睦,君玉.社区警务的理论与实践[J].江苏公安专科学校学报,2002,16(1):153-160. 被引量:7
  • 3王亚新.“司法腐败”现象的一种解读[J].思想战线,2005,31(4):46-51. 被引量:6
  • 4See Cherry Henauh, Zero Tolerance in Schools [ J ] .Journal of Law and Education, Columbia: Vol. 30, Iss.3, 2001, P547-553.
  • 5Russ Skiba, Reece Peterson, The dark side of zero tolerance: Can punishment lead to safe schools? [J] . Phi Delta Kappan, Bloomington: Vol.80, Iss. 5, 1999, P372-378.
  • 6See Norman Dennis (ed.), Zero Tolerance: Policing a Free Society [C] . London: IEA Health and Welfare Unit, Enlarged and Revised Second Edition, 1998, P145,P85, P127.
  • 7Martin Innes, "An Iron Fist in an Iron Glove?" the Zero Tolerance Policing Debate [J] . Howard Journal of Criminal Justice, Oxford: Vol. 38, Iss. 4.1999, P397-410 etc.
  • 8.关于布里科斯顿骚乱的具体情形,1981 Riots Timeline[EB/OL].http://www.channe14.com/history/mierosites/U/untold/programs/riot/timeline.html,.
  • 9Department of Housing and Urban Development,Petitioner v.Pearlie Rucker Et Al,Oakland Housing Authority,Et Al,Petitioners V.Pearlie Rucker Et Al.[DB/OL].Nos.00—1770 and 00—1781.
  • 10Supreme Court of the Utilted States,March 26,2002,Decided.Disposition:237 F.3d 1113,reversed and remanded.Lexis.Nexis.

共引文献55

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部