法官这个职位的存在就是法律本身已经乱套了的证明。The existence of the position of judge is proof that the law itself is in chaos.

[expl]

法官这个职位的存在就是法律本身已经乱套了的证明。
法律本身就应该是清楚和明了的。换句话说，法律既然制定出来了，那么就是要让所有人都知道并遵守的，要不然就没有意义了。
那么，既然是所有人都知道的话，任何人都可以在任何时候判断一个行为是不是合法，如果违反的法律，那么也是任何人都能明确的知道是违反的那一条法律(有人说有可能是违反哪"些"法律，那么这就是法律乱套的一个例子！)。那么，既然人人都明晰了，要法官这个职位还有什么意义呢？就是单纯为了找个理由把大家交税发给某个人吗？
而现在的情况是，法律没有明确的边界，甚至有相互重叠的情况发生(换句话说就是对于一个行为，有不止一条法律在“管理”)，更有甚者对于某一行为的多条规定会出现相互冲突和矛盾的情况。这就是明显的法律乱套的情况(真不知道那些"立法者"们是不是没长眼睛或者没长脑子)，正是因为这个才会需要"法官"这个职位的存在。换句话说就是：乱套的法律下才会需要法官！
那么，法官的作用就是在乱套的法律中找出某一条或几条法律去对应一个行为，那么怎么保证法官不会因为个人情绪或利益而“主观”的做决定呢？答案是没有一个方案能确保法官不会以主观意念做决定。
那么，既然法官的公正性没有办法可以确保，那么制定的那一堆法律是不是就成了笑话了呢？这是不是又绕回了那个没有法律的时代了呢？
是的，这是一个怪圏。
但也不全是，因为有一小撮人，可以用这个“法律”作为幌子来达成其个人的目的。

The existence of the position of judge is proof that the law itself is in chaos.
The law itself should be clear and understandable. In other words, since the law has been formulated, it should be known and followed by everyone, otherwise it is meaningless.
Then, since everyone knows it, anyone can judge whether an act is legal at any time. If it violates the law, then everyone can clearly know which law it violates (some people say that it may be "some" laws that are violated, so this is an example of the law being in chaos!). So, since everyone is clear, what is the point of having the position of judge? Is it just to find a reason to send everyone's taxes to someone?
The current situation is that the law has no clear boundaries, and there are even overlapping situations (in other words, for a behavior, there is more than one law "governing"), and even worse, there are conflicts and contradictions between multiple regulations for a certain behavior. This is an obvious situation of legal chaos (I really don't know if those "legislators" have no eyes or brains), and it is precisely because of this that the position of "judge" is needed. In other words: judges are needed only under chaotic laws!
So, the role of the judge is to find one or several laws in the chaotic laws to correspond to an action, so how to ensure that the judge will not make a "subjective" decision due to personal emotions or interests? The answer is that there is no plan to ensure that the judge will not make a decision based on subjective ideas.
So, since there is no way to ensure the fairness of the judge, then the bunch of laws that have been made have become a joke? Is this going back to the era without laws?
Yes, this is a strange circle.
But not entirely, because there is a small group of people who can use this "law" as a cover to achieve their personal goals.