本文選題：媒體監(jiān)督 + 司法審判�。� 參考：《云南大學(xué)》2012年碩士論文

【摘要】：近幾年來(lái),隨著我國(guó)媒體對(duì)司法審判報(bào)道的逐漸增多,媒體監(jiān)督與司法審判的沖突也引起了學(xué)術(shù)界乃至社會(huì)各界的廣泛關(guān)注。媒體監(jiān)督不僅是社會(huì)監(jiān)督的重要組成部分,還是防治司法專橫和司法腐敗的有效手段。但從中國(guó)近幾年媒體監(jiān)督與司法審判關(guān)系的實(shí)踐來(lái)看,可以發(fā)現(xiàn)一個(gè)明顯的現(xiàn)象：媒體與司法的聯(lián)系更緊密了,表現(xiàn)在媒體對(duì)司法審判更關(guān)注了；但更引人注目的是,媒體監(jiān)督與司法審判的沖突也更為頻繁了。如果說(shuō)1998年的張金柱案件揭開(kāi)了媒體監(jiān)督與司法審判之間沖突的序幕,那么之后的劉涌案、蔣艷萍案則進(jìn)一步深化了沖突。在媒體與大眾的情緒得到宣泄之后,在所謂的“公平正義”實(shí)現(xiàn)之后,冷靜下來(lái)的人們也開(kāi)始理性地去思考：順從民意的司法審判是民主化的法治還是司法審判過(guò)于軟弱而導(dǎo)致了這樣的悲哀?媒體在司法審判報(bào)道的過(guò)程中是否帶有個(gè)人的主觀情緒?面對(duì)諸多的沖突問(wèn)題,我們迫切需要尋求媒體監(jiān)督與司法審判二者的對(duì)話。學(xué)者們對(duì)此做出了呼吁,但從現(xiàn)有的探討來(lái)看,不管是在理念上還是在制度上仍存在分歧。本論文在對(duì)這些觀點(diǎn)進(jìn)行深入分析和思考之后,提出了這樣的觀點(diǎn)：通過(guò)引導(dǎo)媒體作正確的司法報(bào)道和監(jiān)督,來(lái)幫助司法審判實(shí)現(xiàn)獨(dú)立,促成媒體監(jiān)督與司法審判的對(duì)話與合作。也就是說(shuō),媒體監(jiān)督司法審判的重點(diǎn)應(yīng)該是干擾司法審判的各種外部因素,應(yīng)為司法營(yíng)造一個(gè)安靜而中立的審判環(huán)境；同時(shí),媒體也應(yīng)該積極引導(dǎo)社會(huì)大眾樹(shù)立法律信仰和尊重司法的觀念。我們應(yīng)該知道,司法公正實(shí)現(xiàn)的根基在于司法審判的獨(dú)立,而不是依靠媒體的監(jiān)督來(lái)實(shí)現(xiàn)的。媒體的宗旨在于向社會(huì)各界傳遞信息,而不在于是否能代表公平正義。媒體應(yīng)該遵守其合理的監(jiān)督范圍,而不能越俎代庖。 正是基于上述存在的問(wèn)題,本文試圖通過(guò)對(duì)媒體監(jiān)督與司法審判的沖突進(jìn)行初步的探索。導(dǎo)論部分明確了選題的意義,對(duì)近幾年有關(guān)媒體監(jiān)督與司法審判關(guān)系的國(guó)內(nèi)外文獻(xiàn)綜述進(jìn)行全面的介紹。文章的主體分為四個(gè)部分。第一部分簡(jiǎn)單地對(duì)媒體監(jiān)督、司法審判等一些基本詞語(yǔ)進(jìn)行了說(shuō)明。第二部分對(duì)我國(guó)現(xiàn)階段媒體監(jiān)督與司法審判存在的沖突問(wèn)題進(jìn)行闡述并分析了二者發(fā)生沖突的原因。第三部分分析了目前我國(guó)司法審判存在的問(wèn)題,以及媒體監(jiān)督與司法審判由沖突走向?qū)υ挼谋匾�。第四部分是文章比較重要的部分,主要是針對(duì)媒體監(jiān)督與司法審判由沖突走向?qū)υ捥岢龅囊恍┙ㄗh和措施。
[Abstract]:In recent years, with the increasing of media reports on judicial trial, the conflict between media supervision and judicial trial has aroused widespread concern in academic and even social circles. Media supervision is not only an important part of social supervision, but also an effective means to prevent judicial arbitrariness and judicial corruption. However, judging from the practice of the relationship between media supervision and judicial trial in China in recent years, we can find an obvious phenomenon: the relationship between the media and the judiciary has become closer, as shown by the media paying more attention to the judicial trial; but what is more striking is that, The conflict between media supervision and judicial trial is also more frequent. If the 1998 case of Zhang Jinzhu opened the conflict between media supervision and judicial trial, then the Liu Yong case and Jiang Yanping case further deepened the conflict. After the feelings of the media and the public have been released, and after the so-called "fair and just" has been realized, People who calm down also start to think rationally: is a democratic rule of law or too weak a judicial trial that obeys the will of the people? Does the media have personal subjective emotions in the process of judicial reporting? In the face of many conflicts, we urgently need to seek the dialogue between media supervision and judicial trial. Scholars have called for this, but from the current discussion, there are still differences in ideas and systems. After deeply analyzing and pondering on these viewpoints, this paper puts forward the following viewpoints: to help the judicial trial achieve independence by guiding the media to make correct judicial reports and supervision. To promote dialogue and cooperation between media supervision and judicial trial. That is to say, the focus of media supervision on judicial trial should be to interfere with various external factors of judicial trial and to create a quiet and neutral trial environment for the judiciary; at the same time, The media should also actively guide the public to establish legal beliefs and respect for the concept of justice. We should know that judicial justice is based on the independence of justice, not on the supervision of the media. The aim of the media is to convey information to all sectors of society, not to represent fairness and justice. The media should abide by its reasonable scope of supervision, rather than encroaching on its behalf. Based on the above problems, this paper attempts to explore the conflict between media supervision and judicial trial. The introduction part clarifies the significance of the topic, and gives a comprehensive introduction to the literature review on the relationship between media supervision and judicial trial in recent years. The main body of the article is divided into four parts. The first part simply explains some basic words such as media supervision, judicial trial and so on. The second part expounds the conflict between media supervision and judicial trial and analyzes the causes of the conflict. The third part analyzes the existing problems of judicial trial in our country and the necessity of media supervision and judicial trial from conflict to dialogue. The fourth part is the more important part of the article, mainly for the media supervision and judicial trial from conflict to dialogue put forward some suggestions and measures.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：云南大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2012
【分類號(hào)】：D926

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 唐鳴;關(guān)于司法獨(dú)立的含義[J];中國(guó)礦業(yè)大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2000年02期

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

3 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

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

5 趙金;陳力丹;;“構(gòu)建和諧媒體系列談之六” 提升職業(yè)精神 以自律求自由[J];青年記者;2006年11期

6 李修源;關(guān)于輿論監(jiān)督與司法獨(dú)立的兩個(gè)話題[J];人民司法;2000年08期

7 王圣揚(yáng),徐海龍;傳媒:應(yīng)為司法公正發(fā)揮作用——關(guān)于傳媒與司法關(guān)系的調(diào)查報(bào)告[J];學(xué)術(shù)界;2004年05期

8 周慧,冀建峰;我國(guó)新聞媒體監(jiān)督司法審判的體制和文化障礙[J];山西大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(哲學(xué)社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2005年02期

9 褚宸舸;論媒體與司法[J];武漢科技大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2001年01期

10 景漢朝;傳媒監(jiān)督與司法獨(dú)立的沖突與契合[J];現(xiàn)代法學(xué);2002年01期

，

本文編號(hào)：2041644