Reflections on the American political system (2)：对美国政治制度的反思(二)

Reflections on the American political system (2)
——The procuratorial power should be independent as the fourth power
Whether the procuratorial power should be independent is a question we have been studying. The bottom-up judicial corruption in the United States this time has strongly proved the necessity of the independence of procuratorial power.
The US government is a presidential system under the separation of executive power, legislative power, and judicial power. Prosecutorial power belongs to the administrative department of the Ministry of Justice. The Minister of Justice is also the Federal Attorney General, and the states are also the same. Everyone often sees such a situation: When a special investigation is required for a certain event, the President or the Attorney General can appoint a special prosecutor to conduct the investigation. This is a major defect caused by the non-independence of the procuratorial power. If the prosecutorial power is the fourth independent power, and every prosecutor is a special prosecutor, why wait until something happens before appointing a special prosecutor?
We often think about a question: Under the presidential system under the separation of powers, the president is restricted by the parliament, and the parliament is restricted by the majority of votes. What is the judicial restriction? One answer is: it is supervised by the media and freedom of speech. And this time the case of the United States tells us that the media will also become a political tool and speech will be blocked. Who will restrict justice? In addition, who supervises the abuses, omissions, and deliberate cover-up of criminal facts displayed by the US Department of Justice, FBI, and CIA? Who will supervise the dereliction of duty by government officials and civil servants at all levels? These questions tell us a fact that requires the independence of prosecutorial power.
When the procuratorial power is independent, any prosecutor can independently exercise his procuratorial power against judges in his jurisdiction, omissions or violations of law enforcement personnel, malfeasance of officials and civil servants, and even crimes committed by the president. , Including the power of investigation and investigation, no one may interfere. If it is verified that it has constituted a crime of breaking the law, crime of dereliction of duty, crime of corruption, crime of bribery, treason, crime of endangering national security, etc., the prosecutor can directly act as a public prosecutor and represent the country to initiate a public prosecution. It should be noted that, for major criminal cases that need to be prosecuted by the criminal investigation department, the prosecution should be initiated by the public prosecutor's identity, not the personal prosecutor's identity.
We discovered a new problem in the research process, that is, if the prosecutor’s dereliction of duty, who will supervise it? Based on the above-mentioned types of cases handled by prosecutors, most of the clues come from the fact that citizens report. We believe that the law should give citizens a special right to sue, and allow citizens to file a lawsuit against the prosecutor's malfeasance. In this way, a perfect closed loop of power supervision and checks and balances can be formed: citizens elect the president and the parliament, and the president is restricted by the parliament; the president and the parliament appoint judges and government officials; judges and government officials, including civil servants, are supervised by the prosecutor; Supervision by all citizens. The same goes for the states.
After the 2020 U.S. election, people have seen the separation of powers that was highly respected in the past. Today, the executive (such as the Department of Justice, FBI, CIA, etc.), legislation (Congress), and justice (court) are all rotten, so there is a fallacy and Heresy prevails. If there is no faith, no matter how good the system is, it is useless. The fact is that the system of separation of powers in the United States is not perfect, and there are still many flaws. It is these imperfections and shortcomings that have led to the corruption of the administration, legislation, and judiciary in the United States today. A basic common sense is that for the governance of a country, it must rely on a sound system rather than belief. If mankind wants to move forward to a higher civilization, it must continue to design and improve more perfect systems.
We have comparatively studied Taiwan’s political system. Taiwan has always implemented the presidential system under the five powers of executive power, legislative power, judicial power, procuratorial power, and examination power proposed by Sun Yat-sen. Taiwan has become a model of freedom and democracy in the world, and social civilization. Model student. This indicates that the Chinese civilization can contribute and set an example for human civilization in the world, and it can also become a beacon of human freedom and democracy. Let me ask: Is the success of Taiwan a success of the system? Or is it a success of faith? We believe that the independence of the procuratorial power is one of the important power checks and balances.
However, whether the independence of examination rights in the Taiwan system is necessary or not, in terms of its universality, we hold a negative view. We believe that the presidential or parliamentary system under the separation of executive power, legislative power, judicial power, and procuratorial power is the most ideal political model for modern politics, and it is universally adaptable, and China is no exception.
对美国政治制度的反思(二)
——检察权应当独立为第四权
检察权是否应当独立，是我们一直研究的问题。美国这一次表现出来的从下到上的司法腐败，有力地证明了检察权独立的必要性。
美国的政体是行政权、立法权、司法权三权分立下的总统制。检察权归属于行政职能部门司法部，司法部部长同时为联邦总检察长，各州亦然。大家经常看到这样的情况：对某事件需要进行特别调查时，总统或司法部长可以任命一名特别检察官进行调查。这正是检察权非独立所致的重大缺陷。如果检察权是独立第四权，每一位检察官都是特别检察官，何需等到有事时才任命特别检察官呢?
我们常常在思考一个问题：三权分立下的总统制，总统受议会制约，议会受多数票制约，司法受什么制约呢?有一种答案是：受媒体和言论自由的监督。而这次美国的事例告诉我们，媒体也会沦为政治工具，言论也会被封杀，司法又受谁来制约呢？除此之外，美国司法部、FBI、CIA表现出的滥权、不作为、故意掩盖犯罪事实等，受谁监督？各级政府官员、公务员的渎职犯罪，又由谁来监督？这些疑问告诉我们一个事实，需要检察权独立。
当检察权独立时，任何一个检察官都可以对管辖范围内的法官的枉法、执法人员的不作为或违法、官员和公务员的渎职犯罪，甚至包括总统的违法犯罪，都可以独立行使其检察权，包括调查权和侦查权，任何人不得干预。若经查证，确已构成枉法犯罪、渎职犯罪、贪污犯罪、行贿受贿犯罪、叛国罪、危害国家安全罪等，检察官可以直接以公诉人身份，代表国家向法院提起公诉。需要注意的是，刑事侦查部门侦结的重大刑事案件，需要依法提起公诉的，应当由公诉机关的公诉人身份、而非检察官个人的公诉人身份提起公诉。
我们在研究过程中发现一个新的问题，那就是如果检察官的渎职不作为，又由谁来监督呢?基于检察官所办上述类型案件，其线索大多数来自于公民的举报这一事实，我们认为法律应当赋予公民一项特别的诉权，准予公民个人对检察官的渎职不作为提起诉讼。这样就可以形成一个完美的权力监督制衡的闭环：公民选举了总统和议会，总统受议会制约；总统和议会任命法官和政府官员；法官和政府官员，包括公务员，受检察官监督；检察官受全体公民监督。各州亦然。
2020年美国大选后，人们看到了从前推崇备至的三权分立，今天行政(如司法部、FBI、 CIA等)、立法(国会)、和司法(法院)都烂透了，于是有一种谬论和邪说大行其道，说什么如果没有信仰，再好的制度也没用。事实是，美国的三权分立制度并不完美，还有很多缺陷。正是这些不完美和缺陷，才导致了美国今天行政及立法和司法的腐败。一个基本常识是，对于一个国家治理而言，一定是靠完善的制度而非信仰。人类要不断向更高文明前行，就必须不断设计并完善更完美的制度。
我们比较研究了台湾的政治制度，台湾一直实行的是孙中山提出的行政权、立法权、司法权、检察权、考试权五权分立下的总统制，台湾成为了世界自由民主的典范，社会文明的模范生。这标志着中华文明可以为世界人类文明作出贡献和表率，亦可成为人类自由民主的灯塔。试问:台湾的成功是制度的成功呢?还是信仰的成功呢?我们认为检察权的独立是重要的权力制衡因素之一。
但台湾制度中的考试权独立，是否有其必要性，就其普遍性而言，我们持否定看法。我们认为，行政权、立法权、司法权、检察权四权分立下的总统制或议会制，是现代政治最为理想的政体模式，具有普遍的适应性，中国也不例外。