本文關(guān)鍵詞： 媒體監(jiān)督 司法公正 協(xié)調(diào)機(jī)制　出處：《山西大學(xué)》2013年碩士論文　論文類(lèi)型：學(xué)位論文

【摘要】：司法公正是社會(huì)公正的重要內(nèi)涵之一,在法治理念日漸深入的今天,司法公正問(wèn)題越來(lái)越受到社會(huì)大眾的關(guān)注,采取何種方式監(jiān)督司法公正也成了司法工作中的重要課題。與傳統(tǒng)的司法機(jī)關(guān)內(nèi)部監(jiān)督相比,新興的媒體監(jiān)督有其不具備的優(yōu)越性：媒體監(jiān)督的主體具有廣泛性,方式具有靈活性,對(duì)象具有針對(duì)性。正因如此,媒體監(jiān)督作為一種外部的監(jiān)督方式,可以將其監(jiān)督功能最大程度地落到實(shí)處,是保障司法公正不可或缺的監(jiān)督方式。然而在實(shí)踐中,有些媒體片面報(bào)道、不實(shí)報(bào)道、肆意煽動(dòng),甚至出現(xiàn)媒體腐敗現(xiàn)象,不僅無(wú)益于監(jiān)督司法公正,也給司法機(jī)關(guān)造成巨大壓力,甚至出現(xiàn)干預(yù)司法,形成“媒體審判”現(xiàn)象。因此,有必要構(gòu)建媒體監(jiān)督與司法公正的協(xié)調(diào)機(jī)制,使二者之間形成良性互動(dòng)。 國(guó)內(nèi)學(xué)者對(duì)媒體監(jiān)督與司法公正的關(guān)系也頗有研究,但多數(shù)研究沒(méi)有對(duì)媒體監(jiān)督與輿論監(jiān)督加以區(qū)分,以至于在研究中時(shí)有混淆。對(duì)此,筆者將研究對(duì)象限定在媒體監(jiān)督上,運(yùn)用實(shí)證分析法、個(gè)案分析法、比較分析法等研究方法,對(duì)媒體監(jiān)督和司法公正之間的關(guān)系進(jìn)行分析,并提出構(gòu)建二者之間協(xié)調(diào)機(jī)制的建議。 本文開(kāi)篇即提出媒體監(jiān)督與司法公正的典型案例,通過(guò)案例引出媒體監(jiān)督與司法公正關(guān)系的問(wèn)題并進(jìn)行了深入的分析。一方面,從媒體監(jiān)督對(duì)司法公正具有積極意義,二者具有內(nèi)在契合性,得出媒體監(jiān)督必須得到堅(jiān)持和加強(qiáng)；另一方面,通過(guò)分析媒體監(jiān)督對(duì)司法公正的消極影響,也就是對(duì)媒體監(jiān)督與司法公正沖突的表現(xiàn)和原因進(jìn)行分析,得出必須對(duì)媒體監(jiān)督有所規(guī)制。提出了構(gòu)建媒體監(jiān)督與司法公正協(xié)調(diào)機(jī)制的建議：一方面,既要保障媒體監(jiān)督權(quán)利,又要對(duì)媒體監(jiān)督做出一定規(guī)制；另一方面,既要要求司法機(jī)關(guān)寬容媒體監(jiān)督,又要要求司法機(jī)關(guān)敢于拒絕媒體的不當(dāng)干涉。
[Abstract]:Judicial justice is one of the important connotations of social justice. With the deepening of the concept of the rule of law today, the issue of judicial justice is more and more concerned by the public. How to supervise judicial justice has also become an important issue in judicial work, compared with the traditional internal supervision of judicial organs. The emerging media supervision has its own advantages: the main body of the media supervision is extensive, the way has the flexibility, the object has the pertinence. For this reason, the media supervision is a kind of external supervision way. The supervision function can be put into practice to the maximum extent, and it is an indispensable way to ensure judicial justice. However, in practice, some media report one-sided, false reports, wanton incitement. Even the phenomenon of media corruption not only does not benefit the supervision of judicial justice, but also causes great pressure on the judicial organs, and even interferes with the administration of justice and forms the phenomenon of "media trial". It is necessary to construct the coordination mechanism between media supervision and judicial justice so as to form a positive interaction between them. Domestic scholars have also studied the relationship between media supervision and judicial justice, but most of the studies do not distinguish between media supervision and public opinion supervision, so there is confusion in the research. The author limits the research object to media supervision, using empirical analysis, case analysis, comparative analysis and other research methods to analyze the relationship between media supervision and judicial justice. And put forward the suggestion of constructing the coordination mechanism between the two. At the beginning of this paper, a typical case of media supervision and judicial justice is put forward, through which the relationship between media supervision and judicial justice is brought forward and analyzed deeply. On the one hand. From the positive significance of media supervision to judicial justice and the inherent agreement between the two, it is concluded that media supervision must be adhered to and strengthened. On the other hand, through the analysis of the negative impact of media supervision on judicial justice, that is, the performance and reasons of the conflict between media supervision and judicial justice are analyzed. Some suggestions are put forward to construct the coordination mechanism between media supervision and judicial justice: on the one hand, we should not only protect the right of media supervision, but also regulate the media supervision; On the other hand, we should not only ask the judiciary to tolerate media supervision, but also to refuse media interference.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：山西大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2013
【分類(lèi)號(hào)】：D926

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 雷美霞;;中國(guó)輿論監(jiān)督的困境與對(duì)策[J];福州黨校學(xué)報(bào);2008年04期

2 崔琳;;中美兩國(guó)法律文化差異之比較——以“辛普森案”與“鄧玉嬌案”為例[J];法制與經(jīng)濟(jì)(下旬);2011年08期

3 孫晶晶;;對(duì)司法獨(dú)立與輿論監(jiān)督關(guān)系的認(rèn)識(shí)[J];法制與社會(huì);2011年02期

4 魏彬偉;;網(wǎng)絡(luò)化時(shí)代的媒體監(jiān)督與輿情引導(dǎo)——以“涉檢輿情”的引導(dǎo)為視角[J];法制與社會(huì);2012年09期

5 李毅;尋找輿論監(jiān)督與司法獨(dú)立的最佳契合點(diǎn)──“庭審直播”中應(yīng)著重對(duì)待的問(wèn)題[J];中國(guó)廣播電視學(xué)刊;1999年12期

6 梁逍;;媒體監(jiān)督與司法公正研究[J];湖北警官學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2012年02期

7 吳永紅;江成鵬;;對(duì)于“媒體審判”問(wèn)題的反思[J];淮南師范學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2008年03期

8 顧培東;論對(duì)司法的傳媒監(jiān)督[J];法學(xué)研究;1999年06期

9 徐迅;中國(guó)媒體與司法關(guān)系現(xiàn)狀評(píng)析[J];法學(xué)研究;2001年06期

10 賀衛(wèi)方;傳媒與司法三題[J];法學(xué)研究;1998年06期

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前1條

1 王田甜;論輿論監(jiān)督與司法公正的沖突與協(xié)調(diào)[D];中南民族大學(xué);2008年

，

本文編號(hào)：1456155