發(fā)布時(shí)間：2019-06-28 15:02

【摘要】：網(wǎng)絡(luò)科技如此迅猛發(fā)展的今天,人們不斷通過(guò)微博、博客、貼吧等途徑表達(dá)著對(duì)案件調(diào)查、司法審判、執(zhí)行效果等有關(guān)司法活動(dòng)的關(guān)注,伴隨公民意識(shí)的增強(qiáng),以往只局限于社區(qū)領(lǐng)域的談資已經(jīng)拓展到了司法領(lǐng)域,是社會(huì)民主的進(jìn)步,也是民主社會(huì)的憂患。基于網(wǎng)絡(luò)形成的網(wǎng)絡(luò)輿論是阻卻刑事司法公正審判的障礙,還是監(jiān)督刑事司法透明審判的陽(yáng)光,公民的言論自由權(quán)、新聞媒體的監(jiān)督權(quán)與司法獨(dú)立審判權(quán)是否沖突?基于以上疑問(wèn)所產(chǎn)生的價(jià)值分析,將是刑事司法回應(yīng)網(wǎng)絡(luò)輿論的理論基礎(chǔ)。通過(guò)對(duì)一系列典型案例的分析,可以發(fā)現(xiàn)近期刑事審判中,有些法院通過(guò)先進(jìn)科技積極回應(yīng)公眾,收到了很好的審判社會(huì)效果；而有些案例因?yàn)楫?dāng)事人的避之不及,對(duì)于公眾關(guān)注的躲閃,卻遞增了公眾對(duì)于真相的好奇,反而造成謠言四起,導(dǎo)致即便公正審判也會(huì)受到質(zhì)疑。所以,刑事司法應(yīng)當(dāng)積極回應(yīng)網(wǎng)絡(luò)輿論毋庸置疑,只是應(yīng)當(dāng)區(qū)別對(duì)待,負(fù)面、偏激的網(wǎng)絡(luò)輿論將是構(gòu)建回應(yīng)過(guò)程中所應(yīng)當(dāng)規(guī)避的,而檢舉、揭發(fā)沒(méi)有理?yè)?jù)的網(wǎng)絡(luò)輿論則是回應(yīng)方式提升的有利向?qū)�。搭建公眾與司法的溝通橋梁應(yīng)當(dāng)根據(jù)主體的不同,針對(duì)性地完善回應(yīng)方式,如此,才能收到公眾信服審判、審判公正裁決的雙向效果。
[Abstract]:Today, with the rapid development of network science and technology, people continue to express their attention to judicial activities such as case investigation, judicial trial, execution effect and so on through Weibo, blog, post bar and so on. With the enhancement of civic awareness, the discussion limited to the community field has been extended to the judicial field, which is not only the progress of social democracy, but also the worry of democratic society. The network public opinion based on the network is the obstacle to the fair trial of criminal justice, or is it the sunshine of supervising the transparent trial of criminal justice, the right of citizens to freedom of expression, the supervision power of news media and the right of judicial independence? Based on the value analysis of the above questions, it will be the theoretical basis for criminal justice to respond to network public opinion. Through the analysis of a series of typical cases, it can be found that in the recent criminal trial, some courts responded positively to the public through advanced technology and received good social effects of the trial, while some cases increased the public's curiosity about the truth because of the shortcomings of the parties, but increased the public's curiosity about the truth, resulting in rumors that even a fair trial would be questioned. Therefore, there is no doubt that the criminal justice should respond positively to the network public opinion, but it should be treated differently. The negative and extreme network public opinion will be circumvented in the process of constructing the response, while reporting that the unjustified network public opinion is a favorable guide to the promotion of the response mode. To build the communication bridge between the public and the judiciary, we should improve the response mode according to the different subjects, so as to receive the two-way effect of the public convincing trial and the fair decision of the trial.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：昆明理工大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2014
【分類號(hào)】：D925.2;G206

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 蔣鵬飛;劉少軍;;我國(guó)人民陪審員產(chǎn)生程序之弊及其校正——從司法民主的角度進(jìn)行分析[J];安徽大學(xué)法律評(píng)論;2009年02期

2 易延友;陪審團(tuán)移植的成敗及其啟示——以法國(guó)為考察重心[J];比較法研究;2005年01期

3 梁燕;;淺議媒體的輿論導(dǎo)向?qū)λ痉▽徟械挠绊憽獜乃幖姻伟傅嚼畈该襟w輿論導(dǎo)向看司法審判的獨(dú)立[J];今傳媒;2011年11期

4 夏菁;;完善陪審制度,實(shí)現(xiàn)司法民主[J];法學(xué)家;2005年04期

5 孟勤國(guó);判決是法官良知與能力的鏡子[J];法學(xué)評(píng)論;2000年05期

6 陳亦欣;;淺析刑事審判中應(yīng)堅(jiān)持情理法的統(tǒng)一為審判依據(jù)[J];法制與經(jīng)濟(jì)(中旬);2012年02期

7 杜光平;蔣靜;;論網(wǎng)絡(luò)輿論對(duì)司法審判監(jiān)督的正當(dāng)性[J];法制與社會(huì);2009年35期

8 郜占川;;民意對(duì)刑事司法的影響考量——制度層面的優(yōu)化與突破[J];甘肅社會(huì)科學(xué);2011年06期

9 郜占川;;民意對(duì)刑事司法的影響考量——“能與不能”、“當(dāng)或不當(dāng)”之論爭(zhēng)[J];甘肅政法學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2011年04期

10 周?chē)?guó)興;;審判如何回應(yīng)民意——基于盧埃林情景感理論的考察[J];法商研究;2013年03期

，

本文編號(hào)：2507387