本文選題：新聞自由 + 司法獨(dú)立��； 參考：《吉林大學(xué)》2011年博士論文

【摘要】：新聞自由與司法獨(dú)立是民主法治國(guó)家兩項(xiàng)智慧而珍貴的結(jié)晶、兩大同等重要的價(jià)值。新聞自由是民主政治的基石之一,司法獨(dú)立則是法治國(guó)家的重要標(biāo)志。新聞自由與司法獨(dú)立有著密不可分的聯(lián)系,二者之間又呈現(xiàn)出復(fù)雜的關(guān)系�，F(xiàn)實(shí)情境中,媒體與法院從各自立場(chǎng)出發(fā),即媒體為實(shí)現(xiàn)新聞自由積極介入司法活動(dòng),法院基于司法獨(dú)立則排斥媒體的干擾,導(dǎo)致二者沖突的升級(jí)。隨著網(wǎng)絡(luò)時(shí)代的到來(lái),在傳統(tǒng)媒體與網(wǎng)絡(luò)媒體的“夾擊”下,一些案件上升為公共事件,案件的審理結(jié)果受到影響,案件裁判結(jié)果的正當(dāng)性受到質(zhì)疑,導(dǎo)致司法的獨(dú)立性更加脆弱,司法的信賴危機(jī)越發(fā)嚴(yán)重。另一方面,近年來(lái),法院積極加強(qiáng)與媒體的溝通與交流,加大對(duì)媒體權(quán)利的保護(hù),主動(dòng)接受媒體監(jiān)督。但是,從現(xiàn)在的發(fā)展態(tài)勢(shì)看,媒體就一些熱點(diǎn)焦點(diǎn)案件的“監(jiān)督力”受到公眾的積極評(píng)價(jià),而法院為促進(jìn)公正審判所作出的工作努力及其整體形象則得不到應(yīng)有的評(píng)價(jià)。本文首先從新聞自由與司法獨(dú)立的概念、發(fā)展、理論基礎(chǔ)、特性分析入手,從價(jià)值取向、憲政功能、承載體制、運(yùn)行機(jī)理四個(gè)方面全面厘清新聞自由與司法獨(dú)立的關(guān)系,而不是簡(jiǎn)單將二者定位于監(jiān)督與被監(jiān)督關(guān)系;其次從現(xiàn)實(shí)入手,分析媒體與法院沖突的樣態(tài)及網(wǎng)絡(luò)時(shí)代中二者關(guān)系的不均衡發(fā)展態(tài)勢(shì),并對(duì)折射出的問(wèn)題予以理性反思;最后在對(duì)域外一些發(fā)達(dá)國(guó)家和國(guó)際組織平衡新聞自由與司法獨(dú)立關(guān)系的經(jīng)驗(yàn)進(jìn)行比較和考量的基礎(chǔ)上,立足于我國(guó)國(guó)情和現(xiàn)狀,提出新聞自由與司法獨(dú)立和諧關(guān)系構(gòu)建的原則和具體制度設(shè)計(jì)意見(jiàn),以期為我國(guó)的新聞法制建設(shè)作出微薄貢獻(xiàn)。 除了“導(dǎo)論”和“結(jié)語(yǔ)”,全文共分六章(第1章至第6章)。 第1章簡(jiǎn)要闡述新聞自由的內(nèi)涵、理論基礎(chǔ)、權(quán)利實(shí)現(xiàn)與受制等基本問(wèn)題,說(shuō)明其是一項(xiàng)重要權(quán)利但要防止濫用。首先,筆者通過(guò)回顧中西新聞自由思想的歷史演進(jìn),分析其內(nèi)涵及權(quán)利屬性;其次在梳理國(guó)外新聞自由發(fā)展脈絡(luò)的基礎(chǔ)上,多角度闡釋新聞自由的理論基礎(chǔ);最后進(jìn)一步分析新聞自由實(shí)現(xiàn)的條件、方式,特別指出為防止新聞自由權(quán)濫用應(yīng)對(duì)其進(jìn)行限制。 第2章就司法獨(dú)立的概念、基本要素、歷史演進(jìn)及司法受制等展開(kāi)簡(jiǎn)要論述,說(shuō)明其是民主社會(huì)一項(xiàng)重要價(jià)值,但其作為權(quán)力應(yīng)受到制約。首先,筆者對(duì)各種界定司法概念的學(xué)說(shuō)進(jìn)行評(píng)析,闡述司法權(quán)的內(nèi)涵、特性、權(quán)能及基本特征;其次,從理論探索和制度實(shí)踐兩方面,介紹了不同歷史時(shí)期人們?cè)V諸司法獨(dú)立制度的價(jià)值吁求;再次,從司法權(quán)、法院及法官的獨(dú)立闡述其基本要素,并結(jié)合我國(guó)具體實(shí)際闡述司法獨(dú)立的特殊性,指出影響司法獨(dú)立的制度性障礙;最后特別指出與司法獨(dú)立并存的一個(gè)理念就是司法受制。 第3章從價(jià)值取向、憲政功能、體制架構(gòu)和運(yùn)行機(jī)理四個(gè)視角,全面厘清新聞自由與司法獨(dú)立的關(guān)系。首先,筆者以價(jià)值目標(biāo)為視角,認(rèn)為二者在追求自由、正義、秩序價(jià)值方面有著統(tǒng)一性;其次,以權(quán)力制約為視角,認(rèn)為二者均具權(quán)力制約的功能導(dǎo)致在憲政功能上具有一致性。為有效制約權(quán)力尤其是行政權(quán),二者又具有互補(bǔ)性;再次以媒體與法院關(guān)系為視角,從二者在我國(guó)在接受執(zhí)政黨領(lǐng)導(dǎo)上的一致性、滿足公眾知情權(quán)的契合性、自身發(fā)展方面雙方具有的互補(bǔ)性三方面論述二者在承載體制上的相容性;最后,以媒體與法院之間的現(xiàn)實(shí)沖突為視角,從二者作為價(jià)值的固有特性、運(yùn)作方式及各種主客觀因素方面,分析二者在運(yùn)行機(jī)理上的對(duì)立性。筆者認(rèn)為,在應(yīng)然層面上,新聞自由與司法獨(dú)立在保護(hù)人權(quán)、實(shí)現(xiàn)社會(huì)正義、推進(jìn)民主法治建設(shè)上是相互促進(jìn)與統(tǒng)一的。在實(shí)然層面上,媒體與法院分別是這兩大價(jià)值的主要載體,不同的價(jià)值主體站在各自的立場(chǎng)上強(qiáng)調(diào)兩種價(jià)值的某一個(gè)方面時(shí),就導(dǎo)致了價(jià)值沖突。二者在我國(guó)政治生態(tài)環(huán)境中通過(guò)現(xiàn)有權(quán)力機(jī)制尚能控制它們之間的沖突,但對(duì)二者沖突的危害性不可低估。它們都是民主與法治的重要力量,它們的沖突只會(huì)削弱彼此的力量和價(jià)值,整個(gè)社會(huì)也要為此付出代價(jià)。民主法治建設(shè)的進(jìn)步,呼喚新聞自由與司法獨(dú)立的和諧發(fā)展,而二者和諧發(fā)展關(guān)系的形成有賴于觀念的進(jìn)步和制度的安排。 第4章在介紹媒體與法院沖突樣態(tài)的基礎(chǔ)上,對(duì)網(wǎng)絡(luò)時(shí)代中媒體與法院關(guān)系的發(fā)展態(tài)勢(shì)及折射的問(wèn)題予以理性反思。媒體與法院的沖突由來(lái)已久,媒體為實(shí)現(xiàn)新聞自由權(quán)積極介入司法活動(dòng),法院基于司法獨(dú)立排斥媒體的干擾,導(dǎo)致二者沖突的升級(jí)。隨著網(wǎng)絡(luò)時(shí)代的到來(lái),個(gè)人的表達(dá)自由權(quán)在網(wǎng)絡(luò)中得到充分發(fā)展,且網(wǎng)絡(luò)日益成為多種話語(yǔ)權(quán)共存的空間。在網(wǎng)絡(luò)媒體與傳統(tǒng)媒體的“夾擊”下,一些案件的審理結(jié)果受到影響,一些案件裁判結(jié)果的正當(dāng)性受到質(zhì)疑,導(dǎo)致司法的獨(dú)立性更加脆弱,司法的信賴危機(jī)越發(fā)嚴(yán)重。另一方面,近年來(lái)法院積極加強(qiáng)與媒體的溝通與交流,加大對(duì)媒體權(quán)利的保護(hù),主動(dòng)接受媒體監(jiān)督。但是,從現(xiàn)在的發(fā)展態(tài)勢(shì)看,媒體就一些熱點(diǎn)焦點(diǎn)案件對(duì)司法的“監(jiān)督力”受到公眾的積極評(píng)價(jià),而法院為促進(jìn)公正審判所作出的工作努力及其整體形象則得不到應(yīng)有的評(píng)價(jià)。這種發(fā)展態(tài)勢(shì)已不容小覷,需要構(gòu)建相應(yīng)的制度予以調(diào)整。 第5章以比較法的方式,著重對(duì)英國(guó)、美國(guó)、德國(guó)、日本等國(guó)家及國(guó)際標(biāo)準(zhǔn)調(diào)整新聞自由與司法獨(dú)立關(guān)系的立法與實(shí)踐進(jìn)行比較、評(píng)析,理清這些國(guó)家調(diào)整新聞自由與司法獨(dú)立關(guān)系的思想變化與制度變遷,并為筆者結(jié)合我國(guó)國(guó)情,探尋協(xié)調(diào)與平衡媒體與司法沖突的制度,提供有益借鑒。 第6章以我國(guó)調(diào)整媒體與法院關(guān)系制度的現(xiàn)狀及缺憾為切入點(diǎn),構(gòu)建新聞自由與司法獨(dú)立和諧關(guān)系的具體制度。首先,筆者從社會(huì)責(zé)任理論入手,提出加強(qiáng)媒體自律與網(wǎng)絡(luò)倫理建設(shè),理性處理與法院的關(guān)系;其次,提出法院要加強(qiáng)自我完善,以減少媒體對(duì)其負(fù)面評(píng)價(jià);最后,從現(xiàn)有制度缺失入手,借鑒國(guó)外經(jīng)驗(yàn)并結(jié)合我國(guó)國(guó)情,提出新聞自由與司法獨(dú)立和諧關(guān)系制度構(gòu)建的基本取向、原則及具體路徑,以此實(shí)現(xiàn)二者共贏的局面。
[Abstract]:The freedom of the press and the independence of the judiciary are the two precious crystals of the democratic rule of law and the two important values. The freedom of the press is one of the cornerstones of the democratic politics. The independence of the judiciary is an important symbol of the country ruled by law. The freedom of the press has an inseparable connection with the independence of the judiciary, and there is a complex relationship between the two and the reality. In the situation, the media and the court start from their respective positions, that is, the media actively intervenes in the judicial activities for the realization of the freedom of the press, and the court based on judicial independence excludes the interference of the media and leads to the escalation of the conflict between the two. The results of the trial are affected, the justification of the results of the referee is questioned, and the independence of the judiciary is more fragile and the trust crisis of the judiciary is more serious. On the other hand, in recent years, the court has actively strengthened communication and communication with the media, increased the protection of the media rights and actively accepted the supervision of the media. In the media, the "supervision power" of some hot and focus cases is actively evaluated by the public, and the effort and overall image of the court for the promotion of a fair trial can not be evaluated. This article begins with the concept, development, theoretical foundation and characteristic analysis of the freedom of the press and the independence of the judiciary, from the value orientation and the constitutional function, The four aspects of the carrying system and the operating mechanism comprehensively clarify the relationship between the freedom of the press and the independence of the judiciary, instead of simply positioning the two in the relationship between supervision and supervision. Secondly, starting with the reality, it analyzes the pattern of the conflict between the media and the court and the unbalanced development trend of the relations between the two parties in the network era, and gives a rational reflection on the problems reflected. At last, based on the comparison and consideration of the experience of balance between the freedom of the press and the independence of judicature in some developed countries and international organizations, based on the situation and present situation of our country, the principle of the construction of the harmonious relationship between the freedom of the press and the independence of the judiciary and the design of the specific system are put forward, with a view to making a slight contribution to the construction of our country's news legal system. Thin contribution.
In addition to "Introduction" and "epilogue", the full text is divided into six chapters (first chapters to sixth chapters).
The first chapter briefly expounds the connotation of freedom of the press, the basis of the theory, the realization of rights and the basic problems, which shows that it is an important right but to prevent abuse. First, the author analyzes the historical evolution of the thought of freedom of news in China and the west, and analyzes its connotation and rights attributes; secondly, on the basis of combing the development of foreign news freedom, the author This paper explains the theoretical basis of the freedom of the press; finally, it further analyzes the conditions and ways of the realization of the freedom of the press, and especially points out that it should be limited to prevent the abuse of the right to press freedom.
The second chapter briefly discusses the concept, basic elements, historical evolution and judicial system of judicial independence, which shows that it is an important value of the democratic society, but it should be restricted as power. First, the author evaluates the theory of the definition of justice, expounds the connotation, characteristics, power and basic characteristics of the legal rights; secondly, from In the two aspects of theoretical exploration and system practice, the value appeal of people in different historical periods to appeal to judicial independence is introduced. Again, the basic elements of the judicial power, the court and the judge are expounded, and the particularity of the independence of the judiciary is expounded in combination with the concrete reality of our country, and the institutional obstacles to the independence of the judiciary are pointed out. The concept of judicial independence coexists with judicial restraint.
The third chapter clarifies the relationship between the freedom of the press and the independence of the judiciary from four perspectives, the value orientation, the constitutional function, the institutional framework and the operating mechanism. First, the author thinks that the two have unity in the pursuit of freedom, justice and order value in the perspective of value goals, and secondly, the two are all restricted by power constraints. The function leads to the consistency of the constitutional function. In order to effectively restrict the power, especially the administrative power, the two are complementary. Again, the relationship between the media and the court is the angle of view, from the consistency of the two parties in our country to accept the leadership of the ruling party, meet the agreement of the public's right to know, and the complementarity of the two sides of the three sides of the two sides of their own development. The compatibility of the two parties on the bearing system is described. Finally, the contradiction between the media and the court is taken as the perspective, and the contradiction between the two parties as the intrinsic characteristics of the value, the mode of operation and the various subjective and objective factors is analyzed. The author holds that, at the level, the freedom of the press and the independence of the judiciary are in the protection of human rights. The social justice is promoting and unifying each other in the construction of democratic rule of law. On the solid level, the media and the court are the main carriers of these two values. The different value subjects stand on one aspect of the two values in their respective positions and lead to the conflict of value. The two are through the political ecological environment of our country. The existing power mechanism can still control the conflict between them, but the harmfulness of the two conflicts can not be underestimated. They are both important forces of democracy and the rule of law. Their conflict will only weaken each other's strength and value, and the whole society must pay for it. The progress of democracy and the rule of law calls for the harmony of the freedom of the press and the independence of the judiciary. Development, and the harmonious development relationship between the two depends on the progress of ideas and institutional arrangements.
The fourth chapter, based on the introduction of the state of conflict between the media and the court, gives a rational reflection on the development and refraction of the relationship between the media and the court in the network era. The conflict between the media and the court has a long history. The media has actively intervened in the judicial activities for the realization of the right to press freedom, and the court is based on the interference of the judicial independence and the exclusion of the media, resulting in the two parties. With the advent of the network era, the right of individual freedom of expression has been fully developed in the network, and the network has become more and more space for the coexistence of a variety of discourse rights. Under the "attack" between the network media and the traditional media, the results of some cases are affected, and the legitimacy of the results of some cases is questioned, leading to the division. The independence of the law is more fragile and the crisis of the trust of the judiciary is more serious. On the other hand, in recent years, the court has actively strengthened communication and communication with the media, increased the protection of media rights and actively accepted the supervision of the media. However, from the present development trend, the media on the "supervision power" of some hot focus cases has been accumulated by the public. The efforts of the court to promote a fair trial and the overall image of the court do not have to be evaluated. This development can not be underestimated, and the corresponding system is needed to be adjusted.
The fifth chapter, in the way of comparative law, focuses on the comparison of the legislation and practice of adjusting the independent relationship between the freedom of the press and the judiciary by the United Kingdom, the United States, Germany, Japan and other national standards. To clarify and analyze the ideological changes and institutional changes in these countries to adjust the freedom of the press and the independence of the judiciary, and to explore the coordination of the author in combination with the national conditions of our country. The system of balancing media and judicial conflicts provides useful reference.
The sixth chapter, based on the current situation and shortcomings of China's adjustment of the relationship between the media and the court, constructs the concrete system of the relationship between the freedom of the press and the independence of the judiciary. First, the author, starting with the theory of social responsibility, proposes to strengthen the construction of media self-discipline and network ethics, and rationally deal with the relationship with the Law Institute. Secondly, the author proposes to strengthen the self-improvement of the court. In order to reduce the negative evaluation of the media, in the end, starting with the absence of the existing system, drawing on the experience of foreign countries and combining the national conditions of our country, the basic orientation, the principle and the concrete path of the construction of the system of freedom of the press and the independence and harmony of the judiciary are put forward to achieve the win-win situation of the two.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：吉林大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：博士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2011
【分類號(hào)】：D916;G210

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 張文顯,信春鷹;民主+憲政=理想的政制——比較憲政國(guó)際討論會(huì)熱點(diǎn)述評(píng)[J];比較法研究;1990年01期

2 侯健;傳媒與司法的沖突及其調(diào)整──美國(guó)有關(guān)法律實(shí)踐評(píng)述[J];比較法研究;2001年01期

3 郭曉建;中國(guó)傳媒體制改革述評(píng)[J];成都大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2005年03期

4 鄭潔;;試論網(wǎng)絡(luò)倫理的建構(gòu)原則[J];重慶郵電大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2009年06期

5 張澤濤;論新聞監(jiān)督司法的制度設(shè)置[J];法律科學(xué).西北政法學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2002年05期

6 郭道暉;實(shí)行司法獨(dú)立與遏制司法腐敗[J];法律科學(xué).西北政法學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);1999年01期

7 賀日開(kāi);司法改革:從權(quán)力走向權(quán)威——兼談對(duì)司法本質(zhì)的認(rèn)識(shí)[J];法律科學(xué).西北政法學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);1999年04期

8 四川省高級(jí)人民法院課題組;李少平;郝銀鐘;;人民法院司法公信力調(diào)查報(bào)告[J];法律適用;2007年04期

9 王德志;以保障法官獨(dú)立為核心推進(jìn)司法改革[J];法商研究(中南政法學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào));1999年01期

10 郭道暉;;憲政簡(jiǎn)論[J];法學(xué)雜志;1993年05期

相關(guān)重要報(bào)紙文章 前3條

1 吉林大學(xué)法學(xué)院教授、博士生導(dǎo)師，吉林省高級(jí)人民法院副院長(zhǎng) 鄭成良;[N];人民法院報(bào);2001年

2 蔣惠嶺;[N];人民法院報(bào);2003年

3 中宣部副部長(zhǎng)、廣播電影電視總局局長(zhǎng) 徐光春 新聞出版總署署長(zhǎng) 石宗源 中宣部副部長(zhǎng) 李從軍;[N];中華新聞報(bào);2002年

，

本文編號(hào)：2028369