本文關(guān)鍵詞：司法信任危機(jī)與公眾認(rèn)知失調(diào)歸因探析　出處：《西南政法大學(xué)》2013年碩士論文　論文類(lèi)型：學(xué)位論文

  更多相關(guān)文章： 司法信任 公眾認(rèn)知 “藥家鑫”案 “天津許云鶴”案 “瀘州二奶”案 “聶樹(shù)彬”案 歸因

【摘要】：這是一個(gè)自媒體高度發(fā)展，也是一個(gè)公眾參與司法熱情極度膨脹的時(shí)代。近五年來(lái)，“藥家鑫”案、“天津許云鶴”案、“瀘州二奶繼承”案、“聶樹(shù)彬”案判決結(jié)果一經(jīng)出臺(tái)，網(wǎng)絡(luò)上民聲便頗多不滿(mǎn)、民意更是沸反盈天：言必稱(chēng)司法不公、論必及判決貓膩。仿佛每個(gè)人都代表著正義，每句話都充滿(mǎn)了真理，大家抱團(tuán)攻占社會(huì)道德滑坡處的巴士底獄便天下太平一般。 熱情的另一面，即是狂熱，狂熱本身又具備著非理性的標(biāo)簽。公共事務(wù)放諸意見(jiàn)市場(chǎng)自由辯論，，是古典民主的最原始體現(xiàn)，而在代議制民主盛行多年的當(dāng)前社會(huì)，很快表現(xiàn)出了對(duì)公共辯論模式的不適應(yīng)：司法信任危機(jī)的應(yīng)運(yùn)而生，成為了我國(guó)步入社會(huì)主義現(xiàn)代化法治國(guó)家進(jìn)程中的最大羈絆，也在某些程度上增加了社會(huì)的不安定因素。 司法信任屬于司法公信力的部分體現(xiàn)：司法權(quán)力彰顯的公權(quán)力信用，與公眾對(duì)司法判決結(jié)果認(rèn)知產(chǎn)生的信任，二者聯(lián)動(dòng)，組成了司法公信力的運(yùn)轉(zhuǎn)結(jié)構(gòu)。探究司法信任危機(jī)歸因，顯然從公權(quán)力信用與公眾認(rèn)知兩方面著手。然而這二者之間亦非孤立存在，正義的張力以司法活動(dòng)體現(xiàn)、信任存乎公眾一心，公眾認(rèn)知而后在精神層面皈依法理，也是司法活動(dòng)的深層次意義體現(xiàn)，傳媒對(duì)司法活動(dòng)的宣傳，作為杠桿聯(lián)結(jié)并且平衡著兩端。 結(jié)合對(duì)某些案例的實(shí)證研究，吵得沸沸揚(yáng)揚(yáng)的“天津許云鶴”案以二審維持原判告終，二審法院出具了較為權(quán)威的證據(jù)鏈表明許云鶴確實(shí)撞了王秀芝，事實(shí)并非如早期宣傳般撲朔迷離；“藥家鑫”案以藥家鑫被判處死刑告終、公眾皆大歡喜，當(dāng)我們回歸人性的思考，為什么要狂歡著處死我們的同類(lèi)？“瀘州二奶繼承”案，法官違背法律適用一般原理、駁回“二奶”原告追回遺產(chǎn)訴訟請(qǐng)求，公眾額手稱(chēng)慶，但實(shí)質(zhì)上還是個(gè)“情理”高于“法理”的中國(guó)式判決。 民意與司法活動(dòng)落差產(chǎn)生的很大原因，一定程度在于媒體長(zhǎng)期以來(lái)對(duì)司法活動(dòng)的選擇性報(bào)道宣傳，但也不能將司法信任危機(jī)與公眾認(rèn)知失調(diào)之因全歸于媒體導(dǎo)向，某些典型案例的司法活動(dòng)本身亦有不妥之處：河北“聶樹(shù)彬”案中聶樹(shù)彬一審在只有被告人供述、證據(jù)不足，程序嚴(yán)重違法的情況下于1995年被判死刑立即執(zhí)行，十二年后家人才拿到判決書(shū)，而真兇落網(wǎng)近十年聶樹(shù)彬仍然沉冤難雪。 除卻司法信任危機(jī)與公眾認(rèn)知失調(diào)歸因中的傳媒責(zé)任承擔(dān)，司法活動(dòng)方面的紕漏亦會(huì)加深公眾對(duì)法律信仰的裂痕。按照德沃金的政治哲學(xué)理論，不能對(duì)公民權(quán)利做到合法保護(hù)的司法體系，公民就沒(méi)有義務(wù)為它獻(xiàn)出自己的信仰忠誠(chéng)，這是司法活動(dòng)本身所應(yīng)承擔(dān)的責(zé)任。 以群體行為模式為起點(diǎn)，具體分析媒體、司法機(jī)關(guān)與公眾的應(yīng)然行為模式后，將構(gòu)建良性司法信任與公眾認(rèn)知系統(tǒng)進(jìn)行研究，才能回到選題的實(shí)際意義中：對(duì)司法信任的中國(guó)式實(shí)踐起到推動(dòng)作用，亦對(duì)傳媒規(guī)范具有指導(dǎo)性意義。
[Abstract]:This is a highly developed media, is also a great expansion of the public participation in judicial enthusiasm era. In the past five years, "Yao Jiaxin case", "Tianjin Xu Yunhe case", "Luzhou kept woman inherit" case, "Nie Shubin" case verdict was introduced, the network is quite a lot of dissatisfaction with the voice of the people public opinion is, say: cause a shocking commotion unfair justice, and judgment on will be tricky. If everyone represents justice, every word is full of truth, we hold together captured the social moral landslide at the Bastille. Then Peace reigns over the land.
The other side is warm, enthusiastic, fanatical itself has irrational label. The public affairs opinion market free debate, is the most primitive of the classical democracy, and in the current society of representative democracy prevailed for many years, soon showed not adapt to the mode of public debate: the judicial trust crisis came into being, become our country into the greatest fetters the rule of law in the process of socialist modernization, also increased the social unrest in some extent.
Belongs to the judicial trust of the judicial credibility part of judicial power: highlight the public power and public awareness of credit, judicial verdict of the trust, the two linkage, formed the operation structure of the judicial credibility. To explore the judicial trust crisis attribution, apparently from public power and public letter from two aspects of cognition. However, between the two is not isolated, justice tension reflected in judicial activities, the public trust Cunhu heart, and public awareness in the spirit level to reflect the deep meaning and legal, judicial activities, media on judicial activities of publicity, as a lever tie and balancing ends.
Based on the empirical research on some cases, had "raise a Babel of criticism of Tianjin Xu Yunhe case in the second instance upheld in the court of second instance issued authoritative chain of evidence shows that Xu Yunhe indeed hit Wang Xiuzhi, it is not as early as the propaganda" Yao "whirling; case Yao was sentenced to death in public. When we return to the satisfaction of all, thinking of human nature, why should we put the carnival kind?" Luzhou kept woman inheritance "case, the judge violates the general principle of law, dismissed the plaintiff to recover legacy litigation kept woman" request, but the public be overjoyed, China judgment of essence is a "reasonable" than "legal".
Great cause of public opinion and judicial activities fall, to a certain extent that the media has long selective reports of judicial activities of publicity, but it cannot be the judicial trust crisis and the public because of the cognitive dissonance to media oriented, some typical cases of judicial activity is also inappropriate: Nie Shubin Hebei "Nie Shubin" case in the first instance only the confession of the accused, the lack of evidence, procedure of serious violations of the case in 1995 was sentenced to death immediately, after twelve years of personnel, get the verdict, and the murderers were arrested in recent ten years, Nie Shubin is still difficult to clear snow.
Apart from the judicial trust crisis and the public attribution of cognitive dissonance in the media responsibility, the judicial activities of the flaws will also enhance public rift of law belief. According to Dworkin's theory of political philosophy, legal protection of the judicial system cannot achieve the rights of citizens, citizens will have no obligation to give their faith loyalty for it, this is the judicial activities itself should bear the responsibility.
The group behavior pattern as the starting point, analysis of specific media, judiciary and public behavior mode ought to be after, will build a benign judicial trust and public perception system is studied, in order to return to the topic of practical significance: to promote the judicial trust China practice, also on the media standards has guiding significance.

【學(xué)位授予單位】：西南政法大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2013
【分類(lèi)號(hào)】：G206

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前6條

1 孫衛(wèi)華;;“群氓”VS“民眾崇拜”——網(wǎng)絡(luò)語(yǔ)境下大眾兩種角色的學(xué)理透視[J];當(dāng)代傳播;2011年02期

2 付小雙;;淺談刑事司法信任危機(jī)[J];黑龍江省政法管理干部學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2011年06期

3 韋路;李貞芳;;新舊媒體知識(shí)溝效果之比較研究[J];浙江大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(人文社會(huì)科學(xué)版)預(yù)印本;2009年02期

4 賈敬華;;法律論證的效能:排除專(zhuān)斷而非達(dá)成共識(shí)[J];環(huán)球法律評(píng)論;2008年06期

5 鄭永年;黃彥杰;;中國(guó)的社會(huì)信任危機(jī)[J];文化縱橫;2011年02期

6 許崇德;;“憲法司法化”質(zhì)疑[J];中國(guó)人大;2006年11期

本文編號(hào)：1369385