What are the difficulties in combating corruption and promoting honesty in the judicial administrative system?

Hello! At present, the difficulties in combating corruption and promoting honesty in the judicial administrative system mainly include the following four aspects:

(1) The anti-corruption task brought by the financial crisis is arduous. In response to the global financial crisis, the central government issued the measures of "expanding domestic demand and promoting growth", requiring the national * * * to invest 4 trillion yuan by 20 10, and the investment scale in various places is unprecedented. The scale and intensity of organizing and implementing such a huge investment in a short period of time are unique since the reform and opening up. It is not only a major test of the ruling ability and economic construction ability, but also a major test of the anti-corruption ability. How to effectively avoid corruption in the new round of economic construction climax is a major issue, arduous task and severe challenge in the current anti-corruption construction.

(2) The excessive income gap leads to great anti-corruption pressure. The blue book "Analysis and Forecast of Social Situation in China" published by China Academy of Social Sciences in 2007 points out that "excessive income gap and polarization between the rich and the poor" ranks first among the three most prominent social problems in China. Recently, a survey conducted by the National Development and Reform Commission on promoting the formation of a reasonable income distribution system for residents shows that from 1987 to 2007, the income gap between the people with the highest income 10% and the people with the lowest income 10% expanded from 7.3 times to 23 times, especially the income gap between urban and rural residents reached the highest level in history, and the overall Gini index of urban and rural areas reached 0. The Gini index of China residents' income has risen from 0. 16 before the reform and opening up to 0.47 at present, exceeding the international warning line. In the second half of 2007, the research report on Uneven Distribution in Asia published by the Asian Development Bank showed that the average income ratio of the top 20% population to the bottom 20% population in China was 1 1 times, ranking first among the 22 Asian countries included in the study. The income gap is too large, which is easy to cause psychological imbalance in comparison. The gap between the rich and the poor intensifies the contradictions and conflicts between different social classes. The masses often simply think that it is caused by corruption, which leads to hatred for officials and wealth. They have high expectations for anti-corruption and demand that corruption be traced and severely punished, thus bringing greater pressure to anti-corruption work.

(3) The difficulty of anti-corruption brought by the diversification of social value orientation. In the 1950s, some people were corrupt, punished personally, looked down upon by their families and despised by society, thinking, "Why did you do such a thing?" ! But these years are different. If you are an honest official, not only your wife and children feel wronged and miserable, but even your relatives and friends think that you have not borrowed money. This officer is timid! There are still many viewpoints as follows: you can do everything without being an official, and your family and children have good work units, money, cars and houses, and several houses are arranged by relatives and friends. You see, people are so comfortable and chic! What does this mean? It shows that quite a few people's ideas are distorted, and society's tolerance for corruption has increased. This is a very serious matter. In this case, many people can't stick to the right thing, but drift with the tide and gradually go to corruption, which makes the anti-corruption face a more severe situation and the investigation can't be actively cooperated.

(4) The difficulty of supervision caused by the diversity of judicial administrative team. There are civil servants, police officers of prison reeducation-through-labor institutions, cadres and workers of public institutions and freelancers in the judicial administrative team. Civil servants, police officers, cadres and workers of public institutions have relatively good supervision according to the civil service law, prison law, participation in public affairs management and other relevant laws and regulations. Among the freelancers are social lawyers, grassroots legal service workers and judicial appraisers. At present, it is mainly restricted by industry norms and professional ethics. As the competent authority, the judicial administrative department has no hard means to strengthen supervision and punish violations, which is a major problem (difficulty) currently facing. In addition, the current prison management system (the administration is subordinate to the province and the party organization relationship is local) also puts the supervision of the municipal and state judicial administrative departments in a relatively "dilemma" situation, fearing offside, regardless of the vacancy.

Thanks for reading!