|
发表于 2010-11-19 02:54 PM
|
显示全部楼层
Even in many morden Western countries, after the final death penalty judgment, the president or king/queen has the power of pardon. The real issues are (i) whether those administrative leaders respect the law and feel restrained to use such power (in the two cases cited, actually Mao did pretty well), and (ii) in other scenarios involving punishment less severe than the death penalty, whether the administrative branch would/could impact the outcome of the judgment (generally speaking, the second issue is what China's problem is).
Death penalty in exchange for 20 years of clean administration, that's not rule by men, but rule by law. Such view reflects some people's belief in the deterrence effect of harsh criminal liability. But I disagree. The deterrence effect of harsh criminal law has limited contribution to prevent the corruption or other criminal activities. During the 20 years clean administration period, the most contributing factor was a nation-wide pure regilious style of belief in good behavior which keeps people's moral standard very high and forms a general environment of zero tolerance. In such a society where everyone likes to be "Lei Feng", to be saints, to be hero, you do not need the effect of rule by law that much to keep the society bottom line because the society's average line is well above it. After the "Open and Reform," such communism religious belief is gone and the society's moral standard is lowered dramatically. In such a society, you do need objective rule of law to prevent such society's bottom line from being broken and that is the huge task of today's China.
呵呵,法院判完了,为啥还要问XXX?
老百姓说,这两个人头换来了中国官场上至少20年的廉政?
这样的人治决 ...
olderfrog 发表于 2010-11-19 14:16  |
|