批评
打印
In a rare unanimous ruling, the US Supreme Court has overturned the corruption conviction of a former Virginia governor, Robert McDonnell.
在稀有的分歧判决中，美国最高法院颠覆了对前弗吉尼亚州州长罗伯特·麦克唐纳贪污案的治罪。
But it did so while holding its nose at the ethics of his conduct, which included accepting gifts such as a Rolex watch and a Ferrari Automobile from a company seeking access to government.
但是最高法院也对其收取礼品的举动五体投地，这此中包罗承受一家试图买通当局部分干系的一家公司奉送的劳力士腕表和法拉利跑车等礼品。
The high court's decision said the judge in Mr. McDonnell's trail failed to tell a jury that it must look only at his "official acts," or the former governor's decisions on "specific" and "unsettled" issues related to his duties.
初等法院的讯断以为，主审麦克唐纳案的法官没有见告陪审团必需只检察他的“官方举动”，或许与这位前州长职责相干的“特定的”和“未确定的”题目上的决议。
Merely helping a gift-giver gain access to other officials, unless done with clear intent to pressure those officials, is not corruption, the justices found.
法官们发明，只是协助送礼者打仗其他官员，除非出于向这些官员明白施压的目标，不然并不组成贪污罪。
The court did suggest that accepting favors in return for opening doors is "distasteful" and "nasty."
法院的确表现，为送礼者开路并从中图利的举动是“令人恶感的”且“龌龊的”。
But under anti-bribery laws, proof must be made of concrete benefits, such as approval of a contract or regulation.
但是依据《反糜烂法》的规则，必需找出详细的赢利证据，比方同意某项条约或许法例。
Simply arranging a meeting, making a phone call, or hosting an event is not an "official act."
不然仅仅布置碰面、打个德律风、或许举行某次运动并不是“官方举动”。
The court's ruling is legally sound in defining a kind of favoritism that is not criminal.
最高法院将该事情讯断为一种左袒而不是立功的举动是正当的。
Elected leaders must be allowed to help supporters deal with bureaucratic problems without fear of prosecution of bribery.
当选出的当局向导人必需能协助其支持者处置权要体制内的题目，而不用担忧因行贿被告状。
"The basic compact underlying representative government," wrote Chief Justice John Roberts for the court, "assumes that public officials will hear from their constituents and act on their concerns."
针对这次法庭审理，首席大法官约翰·罗伯茨写道：“代议制当局当包括如许的左券，即公职职员会听取选民的诉求，并高兴践行他们的存眷点。”
But the ruling reinforces the need for citizens and their elected representatives, not the courts, to ensure equality of access to government.
但是，百姓及他们推举出来的代表，而合法院，必需确保打仗当局部分的途径是对等的，而这一讯断强化了这种须要性。
Officials must not be allowed to play favorites in providing information or in arranging meetings simply because an individual or group provides a campaign donation or a personal gift.
官员不得因团体或集团提供竞选捐钱或公家礼品而在提供信息或布置碰面时有所左袒。
This type of integrity requires will-enforced laws in government transparency, such as records of official meetings, rules on lobbying, and information about each elected leader's source of wealth.
这种诚信需求在当局通明度上订定严厉的执法，比方要记载正式集会，订定游说规矩，以及发布每个中选向导人的资金泉源信息等等。
Favoritism in official access can fan public perceptions of corruption.
官方性的左袒会激起关于糜烂的大众认知。
But it is not always corruption.
但这并不总是糜烂。
Rather officials must avoid double standards, or different types of access for average people and the wealthy.
相反，官员必需防止双重规范，或是区别看待平凡人和穷人。
If connections can be bought, a basic premise of democratic society — that all are equal in treatment by government — is undermined.
假如与当局的干系可以买卖、那么民主社会根本条件——当局对等看待统统，就会遭到侵害。
Good government rests on an understanding of the inherent worth of each individual.
精良的当局是树立在了解每团体的内涵代价之上。
The court's ruling is a step forward in the struggle against both corruption and official favoritism.
最高法院的判决使得与糜烂和徇情枉法的妥协又向前迈进一步。
