检索规则说明:AND代表“并且”;OR代表“或者”;NOT代表“不包含”;(注意必须大写,运算符两边需空一格)
检 索 范 例 :范例一: (K=图书馆学 OR K=情报学) AND A=范并思 范例二:J=计算机应用与软件 AND (U=C++ OR U=Basic) NOT M=Visual
作 者:周赟[1] ZHOU Yun(Law School,Xiamen University,Xiamen,Fujian 361005,China)
出 处:《时代法学》2023年第6期1-17,共17页Presentday Law Science
基 金:2022年度国家社科基金后期资助重点课题“司法评鉴的应然逻辑及制度构造”(项目编号22FFXA003)的阶段性研究成果。
摘 要:我国当前的司法评鉴制度存在政出多门、叠床架屋等问题。之所以如此,一个很重要的原因就在于,作为司法评鉴基本法的《法官法》以及《检察官法》等法律的相关规定本身存在诸多不足。也正因如此,欲构建系统化且运作效果良好的司法评鉴机制,必先完善《法官法》第六章中关于法官考核之规定;而欲完善《法官法》之相应规定,必先厘清并解决《法官法》相应规定在诸如目的、用语、逻辑、具体内容等诸多方面存在的各种问题。Today s China s judicial evaluation system has many problems and deficiencies,such as Legislative decentralization and overlapping.One of the important reasons leading this state of affairs is that there are many problems in the relevant provisions of the Judges Act(and the Prosecutors Act,etc.),which are the basic law of judicial evaluation.For this reason,in order to build a systematic and effective judicial evaluation mechanism,we must first improve the provisions on judge evaluation in the sixth chapter of the Judges Act.In order to improve the relevant provisions of the Judges Act,we must first clarify and solve the problems in the Act,such aspects as purpose,terminology,logic,concrete content and so on.
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在链接到云南高校图书馆文献保障联盟下载...
云南高校图书馆联盟文献共享服务平台 版权所有©
您的IP:18.189.13.48