死刑適用與民意互動關(guān)系的研究
發(fā)布時間：2018-09-12 13:31
【摘要】：當前我國正處于社會轉(zhuǎn)型期,面臨著貧富分化、結(jié)構(gòu)轉(zhuǎn)換、機制轉(zhuǎn)軌、利益重整和觀念轉(zhuǎn)變等等尖銳問題。在這樣一種過渡性社會中往往充滿了各種社會沖突與動蕩,而司法是社會正義的最后一道防線,死刑適用更是最后一道防線中的重中之重。隨著法治建設(shè)的推進,民眾法律意識增強,對于一些涉及權(quán)貴或官民之爭或弱勢群體維權(quán)的死刑案件頗多關(guān)注,特別是在自媒體發(fā)展的助推下,民意的表達更加順暢,民意能夠迅速凝聚成一股強大的力量,并成為影響某些案件死刑適用的重要因素。民眾對個案的關(guān)注并不僅僅局限于個案本身的案情或者是個案的審判結(jié)果,而是關(guān)注個案背后所折射的不同利益群體。該個案之所以被民眾關(guān)注,是因為它觸發(fā)了民眾廣泛的利益認同,具備了一定的公共性,從而形成了利益表達和維護的需要。一旦處理不妥,這種民意就可能發(fā)展為對社會不滿,對政府不滿,對司法不滿,從而進一步加劇民意與司法的沖突。 從歷史來看,死刑適用與民意之間的互動關(guān)系由來已久,隨著法治建設(shè)的推進,民意與死刑適用的互動更加深入,更加頻繁,民意在死刑適用中的影響也不可忽視。從實踐來看,民意對死刑適用判決的影響,似乎并無明顯的規(guī)律性、確定性可言。筆者收集了大量民意關(guān)注的刑事個案,通過整理分析發(fā)現(xiàn),在某些案件中,民意對死刑判決的促進作用可能是明顯的、正面的、積極的,但在另外一些案件中,民意對死刑判決可能帶來了負面影響。因此有必要進一步厘清民意在死刑適用中的客觀影響,厘清其影響力、影響面、影響方式等,分析其背后的原因及規(guī)律之所在。通過對涉及死刑適用的個案的研究可以看出,對于一些殘忍殺害被害人或貪贓枉法或身份為“官二代”、“富二代”的被告人,民意幾乎一致要求判其死刑,這其中就蘊含了民眾仇官仇富的心態(tài),而這種心態(tài)的產(chǎn)生又得歸結(jié)于社會轉(zhuǎn)型時期的貧富分化、社會分層等；對于一些弱勢群體與權(quán)貴斗爭的案件,民意大多要求對弱勢群體輕判,對權(quán)貴重判,這其中就體現(xiàn)了當前社會弱勢群體遭受了許多的不公平不公正的待遇,民眾希望通過個案的呼吁來改變現(xiàn)狀；對于一些精英犯案或者新型案件,民意分歧較大,也期望司法做出公正判決來引導民眾行為,這說明隨著社會的轉(zhuǎn)型,更多的新的矛盾不斷涌現(xiàn),如何正確面對,民眾需要司法做出正確引導。 當前我國死刑適用與民意之間的關(guān)系的應然走向是民意的影響可以促進司法改革,讓死刑適用更加規(guī)范；死刑適用的規(guī)范也會讓民意更加信服,從而更加支持司法審判,同時死刑適用與民意之間將會有更多的互動。當然,民意不能直接影響個案,這不是公平正義,甚至可能是最大的不公平,因此我們需要用制度引導死刑適用與民意良性互動,正確的死刑適用能帶動民意的支持,民意的極大影響會促進死刑適用的改革,兩者相互促進,共同作用于轉(zhuǎn)型期的中國,共同促進中國法治社會的發(fā)展。 域外發(fā)達國家處理死刑適用與民意之間互動關(guān)系的方式、方法值得我們學習。在這些國家,民意不能直接影響死刑適用,但是民意可以通過合法途徑進入到審判階段或者在立法階段就把民意納入考慮中,從而發(fā)揮民意應有的作用。在研習域外經(jīng)驗的同時,應結(jié)合我國實際,總結(jié)出適合我國當前形勢的恰當方法,保障我國死刑適用與民意保持良性互動。首先死刑適用應該要尊重民意、甄別民意、引導民意,不能一味地順從民意；其次要通過多項措施保障死刑適用與民意的良性互動：一是加強法制宣傳,培養(yǎng)良好死刑觀念,以良好的死刑觀念來改變民眾一味地要求殺人償命的陳舊觀念；二是建立良好制度,引導民意進入司法,讓理性的民意發(fā)揮其應有的作用；三是規(guī)范媒體報道,盡力保障信息真實,防止片面的信息誤導民眾；四是堅持公正審判,嚴格樹立司法權(quán)威,讓司法公正贏得民眾的信任；五是公開審判信息,全面消除民意誤解,讓權(quán)力在陽光下運行。
[Abstract]:At present, China is in the period of social transformation, facing the sharp problems of polarization between the rich and the poor, structural transformation, mechanism transformation, interest reorganization and concept transformation, etc. With the advancement of the rule of law, people's legal awareness has been strengthened, and much attention has been paid to some death penalty cases involving the disputes between the nobles or the officials and the people or the protection of the rights of the vulnerable groups. Especially with the help of the development of the media, the expression of public opinion has become smoother, and public opinion can quickly condense into a powerful force and become an influence on certain cases of death. The public's attention to the case is not limited to the case itself or the outcome of the case, but to the different interest groups reflected behind the case. The reason why the case is concerned by the public is that it triggers the public's widespread interest recognition and has a certain degree of publicity. Once it is not properly handled, this public opinion may develop into social dissatisfaction, dissatisfaction with the government, dissatisfaction with the judiciary, thus further intensifying the conflict between public opinion and the judiciary.
Historically, the interaction between the application of the death penalty and public opinion has a long history. With the advancement of the rule of law, the interaction between public opinion and the application of the death penalty has become deeper and more frequent, and the influence of public opinion on the application of the death penalty can not be ignored. The author collects a large number of criminal cases concerned by public opinion, and finds that in some cases, public opinion may play an obvious, positive and positive role in promoting the death penalty judgment, but in other cases, public opinion may have a negative impact on the death penalty judgment. Therefore, it is necessary to further clarify the role of public opinion in the death penalty. Through the study of the cases involving the application of the death penalty, we can see that the public opinion almost unanimously requests the accused who murders the victim cruelly or perverts the law or who is the second generation of officials or the second generation of rich people. The death penalty implies the people's mentality of hating the officials and the rich, which is attributed to the polarization of the rich and the poor and social stratification in the period of social transformation. In some cases of the struggle between the vulnerable groups and the powerful and noble, public opinion mostly demands a light judgment on the vulnerable groups and a heavy judgment on the power and nobility, which reflects the current social vulnerability. Groups have suffered a lot of unfair and unfair treatment, the people hope to change the status quo through the appeal of individual cases; for some elite crimes or new cases, public opinion divergence is greater, but also expect the judiciary to make a fair judgment to guide the people's behavior, which shows that with the social transformation, more and more new contradictions continue to emerge, how to correct Faced with this, people need judicial guidance.
The trend of the relationship between the application of death penalty and public opinion in China is that the influence of public opinion can promote judicial reform and make the application of death penalty more standardized; the application of death penalty can also make public opinion more convinced, thus supporting judicial trial more, and there will be more interaction between the application of death penalty and public opinion. Influencing individual cases is not fair and just, and may even be the biggest unfair, so we need to use the system to guide the application of the death penalty and public opinion benign interaction, the correct application of the death penalty can lead to the support of public opinion, the great impact of public opinion will promote the reform of the application of the death penalty, the two mutually promote and work together in China during the transition period to promote. The development of China's rule of law society.
In these countries, public opinion can not directly affect the application of the death penalty, but public opinion can enter the trial stage through legal channels or take public opinion into consideration in the legislative stage, so as to play its due role. At the same time, we should sum up the appropriate methods to suit the current situation of our country and ensure the positive interaction between the application of death penalty and public opinion. Benign interaction: first, strengthen legal publicity, cultivate a good concept of death penalty, with a good concept of death penalty to change the people blindly demand the old concept of killing people to pay for their lives; second, establish a good system to guide public opinion into the judiciary, so that rational public opinion to play its due role; third, standardize media coverage, try to ensure the truth of information. Fourth, we should adhere to a fair trial, strictly establish judicial authority, so that judicial justice can win the trust of the people. Fifth, we should make public trial information, eliminate misunderstanding of public opinion and let power run in the sun.
【學位授予單位】：江西財經(jīng)大學
【學位級別】：碩士
【學位授予年份】：2014
【分類號】：D924.1
本文編號：2239152
[Abstract]:At present, China is in the period of social transformation, facing the sharp problems of polarization between the rich and the poor, structural transformation, mechanism transformation, interest reorganization and concept transformation, etc. With the advancement of the rule of law, people's legal awareness has been strengthened, and much attention has been paid to some death penalty cases involving the disputes between the nobles or the officials and the people or the protection of the rights of the vulnerable groups. Especially with the help of the development of the media, the expression of public opinion has become smoother, and public opinion can quickly condense into a powerful force and become an influence on certain cases of death. The public's attention to the case is not limited to the case itself or the outcome of the case, but to the different interest groups reflected behind the case. The reason why the case is concerned by the public is that it triggers the public's widespread interest recognition and has a certain degree of publicity. Once it is not properly handled, this public opinion may develop into social dissatisfaction, dissatisfaction with the government, dissatisfaction with the judiciary, thus further intensifying the conflict between public opinion and the judiciary.
Historically, the interaction between the application of the death penalty and public opinion has a long history. With the advancement of the rule of law, the interaction between public opinion and the application of the death penalty has become deeper and more frequent, and the influence of public opinion on the application of the death penalty can not be ignored. The author collects a large number of criminal cases concerned by public opinion, and finds that in some cases, public opinion may play an obvious, positive and positive role in promoting the death penalty judgment, but in other cases, public opinion may have a negative impact on the death penalty judgment. Therefore, it is necessary to further clarify the role of public opinion in the death penalty. Through the study of the cases involving the application of the death penalty, we can see that the public opinion almost unanimously requests the accused who murders the victim cruelly or perverts the law or who is the second generation of officials or the second generation of rich people. The death penalty implies the people's mentality of hating the officials and the rich, which is attributed to the polarization of the rich and the poor and social stratification in the period of social transformation. In some cases of the struggle between the vulnerable groups and the powerful and noble, public opinion mostly demands a light judgment on the vulnerable groups and a heavy judgment on the power and nobility, which reflects the current social vulnerability. Groups have suffered a lot of unfair and unfair treatment, the people hope to change the status quo through the appeal of individual cases; for some elite crimes or new cases, public opinion divergence is greater, but also expect the judiciary to make a fair judgment to guide the people's behavior, which shows that with the social transformation, more and more new contradictions continue to emerge, how to correct Faced with this, people need judicial guidance.
The trend of the relationship between the application of death penalty and public opinion in China is that the influence of public opinion can promote judicial reform and make the application of death penalty more standardized; the application of death penalty can also make public opinion more convinced, thus supporting judicial trial more, and there will be more interaction between the application of death penalty and public opinion. Influencing individual cases is not fair and just, and may even be the biggest unfair, so we need to use the system to guide the application of the death penalty and public opinion benign interaction, the correct application of the death penalty can lead to the support of public opinion, the great impact of public opinion will promote the reform of the application of the death penalty, the two mutually promote and work together in China during the transition period to promote. The development of China's rule of law society.
In these countries, public opinion can not directly affect the application of the death penalty, but public opinion can enter the trial stage through legal channels or take public opinion into consideration in the legislative stage, so as to play its due role. At the same time, we should sum up the appropriate methods to suit the current situation of our country and ensure the positive interaction between the application of death penalty and public opinion. Benign interaction: first, strengthen legal publicity, cultivate a good concept of death penalty, with a good concept of death penalty to change the people blindly demand the old concept of killing people to pay for their lives; second, establish a good system to guide public opinion into the judiciary, so that rational public opinion to play its due role; third, standardize media coverage, try to ensure the truth of information. Fourth, we should adhere to a fair trial, strictly establish judicial authority, so that judicial justice can win the trust of the people. Fifth, we should make public trial information, eliminate misunderstanding of public opinion and let power run in the sun.
【學位授予單位】：江西財經(jīng)大學
【學位級別】：碩士
【學位授予年份】：2014
【分類號】：D924.1
【參考文獻】
相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條
1 王世洲;關(guān)于中國死刑制度的反思[J];北京大學學報(哲學社會科學版);2004年03期
2 趙秉志;彭新林;;我國死刑適用若干重大現(xiàn)實問題研討——以李昌奎案及其爭議為主要視角[J];當代法學;2012年03期
3 賈宇;死刑實證研究之死刑觀的調(diào)查報告[J];法學評論;2005年03期
4 李唯;;淺析民意與死刑存廢的命運[J];法制與社會;2007年01期
5 吳百花;;自媒體時代死刑適用該如何回應民意[J];廣州市公安管理干部學院學報;2013年03期
6 牟乃紅;;吳英不僅僅是個案[J];經(jīng)營管理者;2007年04期
7 鄭君;;許邁永姜人杰被處死刑的警示[J];楚天主人;2011年10期
8 彥堂;;鄧玉嬌:被民意拯救[J];東北之窗;2009年13期
9 傅達林;;藥家鑫案:司法何時成為觸痛社會的那根敏感“神經(jīng)”[J];法治與社會;2011年07期
10 本刊編輯部 ,常義斌;科學家殺人案撞擊“法律平等”[J];公安月刊;2003年18期
，本文編號：2239152
本文鏈接：http://sikaile.net/falvlunwen/xingfalunwen/2239152.html
