腐败指控对选民的有限影响:内塔尼亚胡总理连任简析

去年秋天,斯蒂芬森教授暗示反腐败团体中的许多人对“许多民主国家的选民(他们)似乎支持已知或被认为腐败的候选人”感到困惑。在过去的几周里,我的许多(非以色列)同事都认同这种困惑,在得知本雅明·内塔尼亚胡赢了这个April 2019 elections将连续第四届(总的来说是第五届)担任以色列总理,尽管有各种腐败犯罪嫌疑,including bribery and breach of trust (see在这里在这里在这里,和在这里)(说内塔尼亚胡赢得选举在技术上有点不准确,因为在以色列,选民不直接投票给他们希望担任总理的候选人,但他们更愿意代表该党参加议会(议会)。Nonetheless,26.46%的选民支持内塔尼亚胡的利库德党,making it one of the two largest parties in the Knesset;许多其他选民支持其他右翼政党,他们肯定会加入利库德组建政府。)那么多以色列人投票支持内塔尼亚胡的政党吗?or other parties sure to back Netanyahu for Prime Minister,mean that Israeli voters simply do not care 188bet appabout corruption?

The short answer is no.The longer answer is that there are three main reasons why voters may have chosen to support Likud despite disapproving of corruption:

继续阅读

Israel Needs to Fight Official Corruption.这并不意味着它应该剥夺民选官员沉默的权利。

On April 9,2019,millions of Israeli citizens will vote in the national legislative elections for the party they wish to represent them in the parliament (the Knesset).对高级官员和各种公众人物(包括总理)的腐败指控进行的大量调查本杰明内塔尼亚胡)确保反腐败将在大多数主要政党的议程中占据突出地位。人们只能希望下届当选的议会能够通过有效的反腐败立法。然而,one piece of anticorruption legislation that has been repeatedly proposed shouldnot被采纳:事实上限制了高级民选官员在刑事审讯中的沉默权,在刑事审讯中,这些官员是嫌疑犯。(拟议的立法实际上也会限制当选官员在回答具体问题时更狭隘的不回答权利,这可能会使他们面临刑事起诉的风险;为了简洁起见,我将只讨论更广泛和更全面的沉默权。)目前,elected officials enjoy the right to silence just like any other suspect in a criminal case in Israel,yet proposals have been repeatedly floated that would require certain high-level elected officials (such as the prime minister,部长们,议会成员,or mayors) who exercise this right to be removed from office.大部分账单,在某些方面彼此不同,适用于与官员职责有关的刑事审问,但有些人走得更远,更广泛地适用于任何形式的刑事审问,在这种审问中,官员都是嫌疑犯。

The explicit goals of these bills are strengthening the war on corruption and promoting public trust in the rule of law.到目前为止,这些法案都没有通过,但过去几十年来,来自不同政界的议会成员一直在调情于这一想法,almost always in response to occasions in which Israeli officials (whose political views typically diverge from those of the proposing Knesset members) chose not to cooperate with the interrogators in corruption investigations.It is very likely that something like this will be proposed again in the next elected Knesset,就像一些政党那样已声明在他们的官方平台上,他们打算促进这类立法。

While I agree that an elected official's refusal to answer interrogators' questions inspires a great deal of unease,通过上述法案将是不合理的,甚至是危险的。尽管提议的法案在技术上并未消除民选官员的沉默权,要求公职人员放弃其作为行使这项权利的条件的地位,是一项十分严厉的制裁,法案无疑对这项权利施加了严格的实际限制。If Israel were to adopt such a rule,这将是对等国家中的一个重要离群点:研究2007年,由议会研究和信息中心进行的调查发现,在世界各地的许多法律体系中,民选官员的沉默权没有同等的限制。因此,采取这样的措施将是史无前例的,但更重要的是,it would be unwise,原因如下:继续阅读

有时动机无关紧要:当局保护(据称)腐败政客的冲动可以为刑事司法改革创造机会

自2016以来,Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has been investigated for a number of corruption allegations (see在这里在这里)在明显的反应中,David Amsalem内塔尼亚胡利库德党的以色列国会议员,提出了几项法案,如果颁布,would help to protect the Prime Minister from these investigations (see在这里在这里)Most recently,2018年6月,阿姆萨勒姆提出了一项法案,将改变以色列的刑事上诉制度。Currently,控方可以上诉刑事判决,包括无罪判决;根据阿姆萨勒姆所谓的呼吁比尔,such appeals would require an appellate court's permission,这种许可只能在特殊情况下给予,and only for crimes punishable by ten or more years in prison.Amsalem,他否认上诉法案与内塔尼亚胡的调查有任何关系,claimed that he proposed this bill because "[a] moral state doesn't have to persecute a citizen who has received a sentence too light for its taste." However,反对党议会成员和评论员——其中许多人通常支持对刑事诉讼程序进行保护性改革——严厉抨击了上诉法案。批评者反对上诉法案的主要(有时是唯一)论点是,该法案的目的是防止控方对内塔尼亚胡可能的无罪判决提出上诉。作为塔玛尔·赞德伯格,反对党主席梅雷兹说,他领导的(政府)联盟执著于法律部门以保护陷入调查的总理,这是以色列民主的一个标志。

对旨在保护政治家免遭腐败起诉的法案的敌意显然是可以理解的,因此,以色列对上诉法案的广泛反对是一种自然反应。Nevertheless,在审议提出普遍适用的刑事司法改革法案时,应克服这种冲动,特别是加强刑事诉讼中个人权利的法案。我不主张上诉法案应被制定成法律,我承认,可能有一些合理的理由来反对对检察上诉的限制。然而,generally speaking,we should not refrain from supporting criminal justice reforms just because their initiators may have had bad motives.Instead,every proposal of systemic reform should be considered on its merits,and,if found justified,得到热情支持,despite its tainted origin.继续阅读

以色列废除警察专员可延长任期的案例

这个investigations以色列总理本雅明·内塔尼亚胡的腐败指控自2016年底开始以来一直受到以色列和世界各地媒体的广泛关注。在最近的发展中,去年9月以色列公共安全部长,Gilad Erdan,正式宣布他的decisionnot to extend the three-year term of the current head of the Israeli Police,Roni Alsheich专员,by an additional year.因此,预计阿尔希奇将在今年年底完成他的任期。尔丹归咎于他决定不将阿尔希奇的任期延长至“在各种问题上意见分歧和方法分歧,其中一些很结实很重,这对公众对警察的信任产生了重大影响。”Opposition members评论员,然而,声称这一决定是由阿尔什海奇一直(或被认为是)领导对内塔尼亚胡总理的调查这一事实推动的。According to the critics,Erdana member of Netanyahu's Likud Party,was acting to please influential senior members of the Likud,as well as Netanyahu himself – an allegation that Erdan否认.

The facts of this particular case are murky.没有确凿的证据表明,埃尔丹不延长阿尔希奇任期的决定与阿尔希奇参与首相腐败调查有关。(事实上,尽管如此,即使是对埃尔丹决定的批评者似乎也不认为阿尔斯海奇的委员职位是完美的。)this incident highlights a larger institutional flaw in Israel's current practice of appointing police commissioners for three years with the option for extension.

以色列法律实际上没有规定警察局长任期的固定期限,nor does it mention anything 188bet appabout the potential for term extension.In fact,Israel'sPolice Ordinance只说专员由政府任命,根据公安部长的建议。然而,多年来,警察局长的任期为三年,这已成为公认的做法(尽管并非没有例外)。and toward the conclusion of that term,the Minister of Public Security decides whether to recommend that the government extend the commissioner's term by approximately one additional year.这种做法应该废除。Instead,法律应进行修订,以任命专员为固定人员,不可延长期限(在某些紧急情况下除外)–由评论员以及克内塞特(Israel's parliament),但到目前为止还没有任何进展。

There are three strong arguments,from the perspective of anticorruption policy,给予警务处处长一个固定的不可延长的期限(此时,无论其确切持续时间如何):继续阅读