英文摘要 |
Although an important part of any given political regime, the judicial system has received relatively little attention from a comparative perspective. The judicial systems in a few western countries have been researched empirically, while systematic analyses of the judicial politics in developing countries remain scarce. As for the research on Taiwan's judicial politics, legal scholars mostly tend to regard the judiciary as a 'legal' institution only. Rather, this study attempts to shed light on this important issue from the 'political' perspective. In assessing the linkage between law and politics, we firmly believe that the judicial systems are bifocal; that is, they are both legal and political institutions. Therefore, understanding the legal and political context within the judicial systems operate is important in studying their role within society. The laws that the courts interpret and apply do not exist in a vacuum, rather the creation, application, and interpretation of law exists within political, social, and economic environments. The judiciall systems are one governmental agency among many, and their activities are influenceds- directly and indirectly-by what other governmental branches and non-governmental actors do or do not do. Moreover, defining politics as the 'process, by which authoritative decisions are made about who gets what in society' indicates that the judiciary, like the executive and legislature, must make choices and that these choices have consequences for society. Viewed in this light, we argue that the concepts'judicial independence' and 'the judiciary should be separate and distinct from politics' are just normative values. Instead, the concept 'judicial fairness' should be a pragmatic and crucial indicator to measure the development of democratization. We look forward to introducing political students to the field of judicial politics and to help generate further research in this area. |