【摘要】： 近年來(lái),有關(guān)“網(wǎng)絡(luò)誹謗”、“手機(jī)誹謗”的案例不斷發(fā)生,相關(guān)當(dāng)事人遭遇逮捕、審訊的案例使眾多網(wǎng)民不敢在網(wǎng)上隨意表達(dá)對(duì)政府非法行為的不滿,不敢隨意發(fā)帖議論時(shí)政,一時(shí)間人們談“網(wǎng)”色變。而這種現(xiàn)象發(fā)生在民主、法治意識(shí)日益深入人心的社會(huì),是極其不正常的。畢竟,在信息社會(huì),網(wǎng)絡(luò)也是政府與公民進(jìn)行有效溝通的一個(gè)重要渠道,是政府了解輿情、關(guān)注民生的一個(gè)重要窗口。 網(wǎng)上發(fā)帖雖然是借助網(wǎng)絡(luò)這一傳播迅捷的平臺(tái),利用文字、圖片等形式,拓寬了言論傳播的范圍,但與傳統(tǒng)的信訪渠道相比,仍然是在行使憲法賦予的基本權(quán)利,包括憲法規(guī)定的言論自由權(quán)、批評(píng)建議權(quán)和監(jiān)督權(quán)。但當(dāng)事人卻屢屢被地方司法機(jī)關(guān)以“涉嫌誹謗”的罪名進(jìn)行立案?jìng)刹?其原因在于這些權(quán)利是否能夠在互聯(lián)網(wǎng)上順暢地行使,發(fā)帖行為能否得到官方的認(rèn)可�；ヂ�(lián)網(wǎng)帶來(lái)了有關(guān)言論自由權(quán)的表達(dá)途徑問(wèn)題,但在內(nèi)容和形式上,同其他傳播介質(zhì)其實(shí)并沒有實(shí)質(zhì)性差別,關(guān)鍵在于能否對(duì)相關(guān)法律條文進(jìn)行正確的解讀和判斷。而這個(gè)過(guò)程也是矛盾雙方,即地方政府和行使言論自由權(quán)的公民的利益相互沖突與協(xié)調(diào)的過(guò)程。因此,有必要為公民利用網(wǎng)上發(fā)帖的形式行使憲法權(quán)利找到相關(guān)的法律依據(jù)作為支撐,才能杜絕地方政府隨意動(dòng)用國(guó)家機(jī)器踐踏公民基本權(quán)利現(xiàn)象的發(fā)生。 筆者以所選案例為重點(diǎn),進(jìn)行了仔細(xì)的解讀后,對(duì)該案所引發(fā)的法律爭(zhēng)議展開論述,并結(jié)合我國(guó)當(dāng)前的具體法律法規(guī),參考國(guó)內(nèi)外法學(xué)界的新觀點(diǎn),詳細(xì)探討了言論自由權(quán)、批評(píng)建議權(quán)的內(nèi)涵和價(jià)值,闡述了誹謗罪的犯罪構(gòu)成,對(duì)相關(guān)法律概念進(jìn)行了合理界定,并歸納了該類案例產(chǎn)生的原因,提出一些積極的應(yīng)對(duì)策略及立法建議。希望通過(guò)本文的寫作,喚起法律研究者、行政權(quán)力的行使者對(duì)本類案件的再思考與再認(rèn)識(shí),喚起全社會(huì)對(duì)憲法基本權(quán)利的尊重意識(shí),尤其是基層政權(quán)能夠?qū)υ擁?xiàng)權(quán)利的行使提供切實(shí)的保障。 本文是以該案例為重點(diǎn),結(jié)合類似相關(guān)案例,展開論述,得出結(jié)論的,但對(duì)該案例及相關(guān)案例的分析與界定也只是一種學(xué)術(shù)上的探討,其可行性有待實(shí)踐的進(jìn)一步驗(yàn)證。
[Abstract]:In recent years, cases of "internet libel" and "mobile phone libel" have continued to occur. The relevant parties have been arrested and the cases of interrogation have made many netizens afraid to express their dissatisfaction with the illegal actions of the government on the Internet at will. Dare not arbitrarily post comments on current politics, people talk about the "net" color change. But this kind of phenomenon occurs in the democracy, the rule of law consciousness day by day deeply popular society, is extremely abnormal. After all, in the information society, the network is also an important channel for the government to communicate effectively with the citizens. It is also an important window for the government to understand the public opinion and pay attention to the people's livelihood. Although posting on the Internet is a platform for rapid communication through the Internet and in the form of words, pictures, etc., it broadens the scope of speech dissemination, but compared with the traditional channels of letters and visits, it is still exercising the basic rights conferred by the Constitution. This includes the constitutional right to freedom of speech, criticism and supervision. However, the litigants are frequently investigated by the local judicial authorities on the charge of "suspected libel". The reason lies in whether these rights can be smoothly exercised on the Internet and whether the posting behavior can be officially recognized. The Internet has brought about the question of the expression way of the right to freedom of expression, but in content and form, there is no substantial difference between the Internet and other media, the key lies in whether the relevant legal provisions can be correctly interpreted and judged. This process is also a process of conflict and coordination between the conflicting parties, that is, the local government and the citizens exercising the right to freedom of speech. Therefore, it is necessary to find the relevant legal basis for citizens to use the form of online posts to exercise their constitutional rights as support, in order to prevent local governments from trampling on citizens' basic rights by using the state machinery at will. After careful interpretation of the selected cases, the author discusses the legal disputes caused by the case, and discusses the right to freedom of speech in detail, combining with the specific laws and regulations of our country and referring to the new viewpoints of the domestic and foreign legal circles. This paper discusses the connotation and value of the right to comment, expounds the criminal constitution of libel, defines the relevant legal concepts reasonably, sums up the causes of this kind of cases, and puts forward some positive countermeasures and legislative suggestions. Through the writing of this paper, I hope to arouse the legal researchers, the executive power of the exercise of this kind of cases to re-think and re-understanding, arouse the whole society to respect the basic rights of the Constitution, In particular, grassroots power can provide practical protection for the exercise of this right. This paper is focused on this case, combined with similar related cases, to start the discussion, draw a conclusion, but the case and related cases of the analysis and definition is only an academic discussion, its feasibility needs to be further verified by practice.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：蘭州大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2010
【分類號(hào)】：D920.5

【引證文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前4條

1 朱愛萍;論公職人員名譽(yù)權(quán)的限制[D];華東政法大學(xué);2011年

2 焦湘齊;網(wǎng)絡(luò)誹謗的犯罪預(yù)防與司法處置[D];煙臺(tái)大學(xué);2011年

3 楊磊;網(wǎng)絡(luò)環(huán)境下誹謗罪的認(rèn)定[D];西南政法大學(xué);2011年

4 田海仙;論網(wǎng)絡(luò)誹謗犯罪的刑事法規(guī)制[D];河北大學(xué);2013年

，

本文編號(hào)：2366426