首页> 外文期刊>Journal of Eurasian Studies >The politics of prosecution service reform in new presidential democracies: The South Korea and Russia cases in comparative perspective
【24h】

The politics of prosecution service reform in new presidential democracies: The South Korea and Russia cases in comparative perspective

机译:新总统制民主国家起诉服务改革的政治:比较视角下的韩国和俄罗斯案例

获取原文
       

摘要

This paper explains why large-scale reform of a civil-law prosecution system will be abandoned, fail, or succeed in exceptional cases, focusing on the strategic interaction between an incumbent president and prosecutors, through a comparative analysis of the South Korea and Russia cases. A civil-law prosecution system could hardly be reformed, although there were several attempts to correct the politicization of the prosecution service, in new presidential democracies. An incumbent president sometimes considers major reform against the prosecutors, but he or she tends to abandon it and seek to form alliance with them, expecting short-term political benefits under intense political competition. Moreover, although a president strongly pushes for large-scale prosecution service reform, he or she also cannot easily achieve this goal, since the prosecutors' willful initiation of criminal proceedings will cause his or her momentum to decline. Indeed, only Putin exceptionally succeeded in major reform of the prosecution system under weak political competition, among South Korean and Russian Presidents after democratization.
机译:本文通过对韩国和俄罗斯案件的比较分析,解释了为什么在特殊情况下,大规模的民法起诉制度改革将被放弃,失败或成功,而着眼于现任总统和检察官之间的战略互动。尽管在新的总统制民主国家进行了数次纠正检察机关政治化的尝试,但民法起诉制度几乎无法改革。现任总统有时会考虑对检察官进行重大改革,但他或她倾向于放弃检举并寻求与检察官结盟,并期望在激烈的政治竞争中获得短期政治利益。此外,尽管总统大力推动大规模的检察机构改革,但由于检察官故意提起刑事诉讼将导致其势头减弱,因此他或她也无法轻易实现这一目标。确实,只有普京在民主化之后的韩国和俄罗斯总统之间的政治竞争疲软的情况下,才例外地成功地对起诉制度进行了重大改革。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号