Research On The Public Trial System

The public trial is the essential characteristics of the modern countries legal system, the basic performance of the social democratic condition. In our country, along with the advancement of legal construction and the enhancement of the public legal awareness and human rights guarantee consciousness, the request for the openness of criminal trial is getting much higher. However, there exist many problems in our public trial system. It can not meet the requirements of populace and guarantee their participation in the trial, which lead to unacceptable decisions, enormous indignation and degradation of the judicial prestige. Therefore, in the wake of the revision of Law of Criminal Procedure, it is significant to discuss our country's public trial system thoroughly and change the situation that the decision can not be widely accepted.Only with the people's participation that judicature's fairness can be truly guaranteed. Only the judicature that is approved by people is the true fair judicature. The author thought that the standard for the decision to be accepted by the populace is that the decision should conform to populace's mutual recognition. The fairness of the decision can only be obtained and examined through the populace to its nitpicking. The public trial provides one most effective method and way for the populace to participate in the trial and surveillance on the trial. From this point, the construction of the public trial system must be put towards the direction of being more public and much more transparent; being more accessible to the populace to make sure the rationality of the judge conforms to the rationality of the populace so that the decision that expresses the rationality of the populace can be accepted. Through comparative analysis of concrete implementation of the public trial system under two large models, the accuracy and the feasibility of the above conclusion has been confirmed. The author thought that our country's public trial system had not guaranteed the populace full participation, and its value has not been fully manifested. In view of the above question, this article, from the enlightenment to the concrete implementation of the Western major countries' public trial systems, compared them with our country public trial system and then discovered the question and the reason behind it. This article also made ideal of the feasible public trial system and suggested partial openness of the disclosed case, in attempt to improve the criminal public trial system in our country. The full text altogether has four parts besides the introduction and the conclusion, approximately 30,000 characters. The content is as follows:The first is the open trial system's historical development. The public trial system is related to the development of democracy system: the higher the judicial trial's democratized degree is, the higher the public trial's degree. The public trial system's development has experienced historical and the rational examination following stage: Ancient Rome time, Dark Middle Ages, 17, the 18th century, two world war during the 20th century and World War II. In the different time, the trial openness had the different characteristic. After the World War II, the public trial system was included in many international conventions; its international standard hence had been established. After several century's development, public trial, its concept, the content, the object, the rationale, the democratic manifestation of as well as the unique value were already known by the people.The second part is the implementation of world major countries' public trial system. Through an introduction to the implementation of the world major countries' public trial system, and to its analysis, the summary, we may obtain two big classical patterns of the public trial system: First, the litigant principle country's open trial system is through the legal procedure strict control and the right procedure to be completely public, by the way of "can see" right procedure's deference is exposed in front of the populace, accepts populace's surveillance and the examination, which assures the implementation of the public trial in this way have the good results. Second, the authority principle countries stress to places on trial the result. That is openness of judge's heart card process and reason. The publicity of evidence and the reason by "can see" the way exposes judge in front of the populace, accepts populace's surveillance and the examination, which assures the implementation of the public trial in this way have the good results. Although to places on trial the public emphasis to be different, but both can make the populaces accept the sentence, which one kind of pattern were we unable to obtain to be more superior. Simultaneously we have been inspired: The trial process and the result must be "the transparence", and public's surveillance, with populace's mutual recognition, the populace nitpicking must be guaranteed to examine the decision for its fairness.The third part is the present situation and question of our country public trial system. Our country law basically conforms to the international standard regarding the stipulation of the public trial. But compared with western major countries, our pubic trial system has the very big disparity and many problems. The reasons for the problems are various. But the existing problems of our country public trial system caused the public trial value not to be able to be realized, mainly displayed in the populace no acceptance to the decision.The fourth part is the suggestion on the reform of our country's public trial system. Through the exposure of the result, that is, publicity of evidence, the surveillance of the populace can be guaranteed and the value of the public trial can be realized. Regarding our country's public trial case, the author advocated that it should be stipulated that part of the disclosed cases ought to be publicized: the scope of the disclose cases should be reduced; the populace's surveillance to the public trial should be expanded; the rights of the defendant and the fairness of the trial should be better guaranteed.