本文關(guān)鍵詞： 網(wǎng)絡(luò)輿論 司法公正 沖突與協(xié)調(diào) 良性互動(dòng)　出處：《山西大學(xué)》2011年碩士論文　論文類(lèi)型：學(xué)位論文

【摘要】：由于公眾在傳統(tǒng)媒體上評(píng)論司法審判活動(dòng)的渠道阻塞性及網(wǎng)絡(luò)自身的優(yōu)越性,網(wǎng)絡(luò)越來(lái)越受到人們的喜愛(ài),成為公眾評(píng)論案件,監(jiān)督司法審判活動(dòng)的重要平臺(tái)。因此,網(wǎng)絡(luò)輿論也成為了監(jiān)督司法審判的重要方式和不可忽視的力量,其可以使司法案件備受關(guān)注,督促案件的審理趨向公開(kāi)、公平和公正,通過(guò)其與司法審判形成良性互動(dòng),從而促進(jìn)司法公正的實(shí)現(xiàn)。然而,一旦對(duì)網(wǎng)絡(luò)輿論不加任何限制和監(jiān)管而任由其表達(dá),那么其必將干擾法官的判斷,影響司法審判的獨(dú)立性和公正性。因此,尋找到網(wǎng)絡(luò)輿論監(jiān)督與司法審判之間沖突的原因,如何有效化解網(wǎng)絡(luò)輿論監(jiān)督與司法審判之間的矛盾,實(shí)現(xiàn)網(wǎng)絡(luò)輿論與司法審判之間的良性互動(dòng),對(duì)于促進(jìn)司法公正的實(shí)現(xiàn)具有重要的意義。 本文首先通過(guò)對(duì)輿論、正義等基本概念的考察、概括、總結(jié)和分析,得出網(wǎng)絡(luò)輿論監(jiān)督和司法公正的概念,為下文論證我國(guó)的網(wǎng)絡(luò)輿論監(jiān)督和司法公正打下了理論基礎(chǔ)。其次,通過(guò)對(duì)網(wǎng)絡(luò)輿論與司法審判沖突的表現(xiàn)形式的概括總結(jié),來(lái)探求造成二者沖突的各種原因。網(wǎng)絡(luò)輿論在監(jiān)督司法審判過(guò)程中,由于網(wǎng)絡(luò)輿論和司法審判的固有屬性之不同,因此,網(wǎng)絡(luò)輿論與司法審判在案件事實(shí)認(rèn)定標(biāo)準(zhǔn)、追求標(biāo)準(zhǔn)及對(duì)待案件態(tài)度上的差異導(dǎo)致了二者的沖突。然而,這在本質(zhì)上準(zhǔn)確的體現(xiàn)了利益主體之間對(duì)于法的價(jià)值的不同追求而產(chǎn)生的沖突。所以,網(wǎng)絡(luò)輿論與司法公正沖突的本質(zhì)是網(wǎng)絡(luò)輿論與司法審判在自由與正義、自由與秩序、權(quán)利與權(quán)力等價(jià)值維度的沖突,這些價(jià)值沖突是可以調(diào)和的。最后,希望通過(guò)上述的理論分析,能夠準(zhǔn)確定位網(wǎng)絡(luò)輿論,實(shí)現(xiàn)對(duì)網(wǎng)絡(luò)輿論的法律監(jiān)管,解決網(wǎng)絡(luò)輿論與司法審判的沖突并使它們形成良性互動(dòng),最終實(shí)現(xiàn)司法公正。網(wǎng)絡(luò)輿論的定位在于它只是滿足公眾知情權(quán)和自由表達(dá)公眾意愿的工具,網(wǎng)絡(luò)輿論關(guān)于司法審判的報(bào)道與評(píng)議只是在幫助公眾實(shí)現(xiàn)知情權(quán)和言論自由權(quán),而其對(duì)司法活動(dòng)的監(jiān)督只是由此產(chǎn)生的副產(chǎn)品。因此,網(wǎng)絡(luò)輿論的存在價(jià)值在于滿足公眾對(duì)司法審判信息的知情權(quán),其職責(zé)在于客觀、全面、真實(shí)的報(bào)道和評(píng)價(jià)司法審判活動(dòng),監(jiān)督司法審判活動(dòng)公開(kāi)、公正、公平的進(jìn)行。而司法審判的價(jià)值在于通過(guò)公開(kāi)的審理,公正的判決,實(shí)現(xiàn)審判“三個(gè)效果”的統(tǒng)一來(lái)化解社會(huì)予盾,實(shí)現(xiàn)司法公正所以,網(wǎng)絡(luò)輿論監(jiān)督與司法審判的共同目標(biāo)是一致的,即通過(guò)自身的努力來(lái)促進(jìn)司法公正的實(shí)現(xiàn)。在實(shí)踐方面,希望可以為網(wǎng)絡(luò)輿論正確監(jiān)督司法審判,及對(duì)其自身的法律監(jiān)管提供理論依據(jù)。
[Abstract]:Because the public comments on the judicial activities in the traditional media channel obstruction and the advantages of the network itself, the network has become more and more popular and become a public comment cases. Therefore, the network of public opinion has become an important way to supervise the judicial trial and can not be ignored, it can make judicial cases receive much attention, urge the trial of cases tend to be open. Fairness and justice, through its benign interaction with the judicial trial, thereby promoting the realization of judicial justice. However, once the network of public opinion without any restrictions and supervision and let it express. So it will interfere with the judge's judgment and affect the independence and impartiality of the judicial trial. Therefore, find out the reason of the conflict between the network public opinion supervision and the judicial trial. How to effectively resolve the contradiction between network public opinion supervision and judicial trial and realize the benign interaction between network public opinion and judicial trial is of great significance to promote the realization of judicial justice. First of all, through the investigation of the basic concepts of public opinion, justice and other basic concepts, summarized, summarized and analyzed, the concept of network public opinion supervision and judicial justice is obtained. It lays a theoretical foundation for the following argumentation of our country's network public opinion supervision and judicial justice. Secondly, it summarizes the manifestation of the conflict between network public opinion and judicial trial. To explore the causes of the conflict between the two. Network public opinion in the process of supervision of judicial trial, because of the inherent nature of network public opinion and judicial trial is different, so. The differences between network public opinion and judicial trial in the standards of case fact determination, pursuit of standards and attitude towards cases lead to the conflict between the two. This in essence accurately reflects the conflict between the interests of the different pursuit of the value of law. Therefore, the essence of the conflict between network public opinion and judicial justice is the freedom and justice of network public opinion and judicial trial. Freedom and order, rights and power and other value dimensions of conflict, these value conflicts can be reconciled. Finally, I hope that through the above theoretical analysis, can accurately locate the network public opinion. Realize the legal supervision of network public opinion, resolve the conflict between network public opinion and judicial trial and make them form benign interaction. The orientation of network public opinion is that it is only a tool to satisfy the public's right to know and to express the public's will freely. The network public opinion about the judicial trial reports and comments only helps the public to realize the right to know and the right to freedom of expression, and its supervision of the judicial activities is only a by-product. The existence value of network public opinion lies in satisfying the public's right to know about judicial trial information, and its duty lies in objective, comprehensive and true reporting and evaluation of judicial trial activities, and in supervising the openness and fairness of judicial trial activities. The value of judicial trial lies in the realization of the unity of the "three effects" of trial through public trial, fair judgment, and the realization of judicial justice. The common goal of network public opinion supervision and judicial trial is the same, that is, through its own efforts to promote the realization of judicial justice. In practice, I hope to correctly supervise the judicial trial for the network public opinion. And its own legal supervision to provide the theoretical basis.
【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】：2011
【分類(lèi)號(hào)】：D926;G206

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前9條

1 何源;網(wǎng)絡(luò)中的輿論監(jiān)督[J];當(dāng)代傳播;2002年06期

2 裴曉軍;網(wǎng)絡(luò)新聞與輿論監(jiān)督[J];廣播電視大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(哲學(xué)社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2002年02期

3 譚偉;網(wǎng)絡(luò)輿論概念及特征[J];湖南社會(huì)科學(xué);2003年05期

4 金霞;論網(wǎng)絡(luò)傳播的輿論監(jiān)督[J];湖北民族學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào)(哲學(xué)社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2003年02期

5 彭鵬;網(wǎng)絡(luò)輿論的功能及調(diào)控策略[J];南京政治學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2005年03期

6 劉李明;馮云翔;;司法過(guò)程中的輿論模式及其現(xiàn)代性特質(zhì)[J];內(nèi)蒙古社會(huì)科學(xué)(漢文版);2006年03期

7 董莉;對(duì)“以事實(shí)為根據(jù)”原則中“事實(shí)”的再認(rèn)識(shí)[J];江西社會(huì)科學(xué);2002年08期

8 陳東升;沖突與權(quán)衡:法律價(jià)值選擇的方法論思考[J];法制與社會(huì)發(fā)展;2003年01期

9 陳力丹;論網(wǎng)絡(luò)傳播的自由與控制[J];新聞與傳播研究;1999年03期

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前4條

1 李海南;我國(guó)網(wǎng)絡(luò)輿論監(jiān)督現(xiàn)狀分析及對(duì)策研究[D];河北大學(xué);2006年

2 白海濱;網(wǎng)絡(luò)輿論及其調(diào)控研究[D];西南大學(xué);2008年

3 顏開(kāi)云;網(wǎng)絡(luò)輿論監(jiān)督及其影響[D];暨南大學(xué);2006年

4 黃佳鵬;網(wǎng)絡(luò)輿論監(jiān)督對(duì)司法過(guò)程的影響[D];黑龍江大學(xué);2007年

，

本文編號(hào)：1486643