Discussion On Press Freedom And Judicial Independence

Right to free press and independent jurisdiction are the two bases for a modernized country ruled with laws. Sometimes, they are compatible and complimented. But on the other hand, there may be some conflictions between them. So, it is a thoughtful topic how to well treat their relations or to balance them. It is also an essential problem between theory and practice. In this essay, the author first analyzes theoretically the value of right to free press and independent jurisdiction and their inter-relationship; then, some cases from the jury system in England and in America, and the non-jury system in Germany and in Japan are comparatively discussed. Upon the comparison, we can judge the development of how the high courts shape their rules and judicial orders on some problems and we can see how they balance the conflicts between the human rights, interests and values, and how they make their choices; finally, some suggestions are put forward for the legislations and jurisdictions in China with regards to the present conditions.Right to free press and independent jurisdiction both are important and cannot be interchanged. Media and jurisdiction are two structures of a modern society, which are consistent in value but each has its way to realize the values. To maximally enlarge their functions for the media and for the jurisdiction in pursuing their value in their own way, systematically speaking, right to free press and independent jurisdiction are inevitable. Right to free press is the extension of free speech and free expression, or the realized free speech and free expression embodied in media. Generally speaking, free press helps people pursue the rule and enlarge their horizon; it helps the democracy be maintained and unproved; it also helps the individual vale be sustained and promoted. Independent jurisdiction has two meanings: it means the judicial organizations are independent to the other organizations and individuals; on the other hand, in judicial procedures, it means the rights empowered to the judges can be maintained and their fair and right decisions can be protected. It demands that the judicial right should not be influenced, interfered or forced in order to realize its independence. In a modernized country ruled with laws, the jurisdiction and the press should support each other to realize their common value; on the other hand, they should prevent each from diverting from the designed valued and help each make efforts to change. The inter-relationship between the media and the jurisdiction is complicated in two aspects: the media is active in commenting the judicial activities and probably interferes in the independence of jurisdiction; meanwhile, the judicial organizations will be on alert to the press. Why the principles of right to freepress and independent jurisdiction are conflicting has become an essential problem between the media and the jurisdiction, which in fact inflects that the media intends to maximum the right to free speech and to free expression. However, the jurisdiction hopes to have the civil rights maximally deprived from the independent right of fair judgment. Therefore, the conflicts are inevitable. However, the free press and independent jurisdiction are common in value and in targets, which intend to protect the human rights and the social righteousness. This is the very balancing base for them to harmonize with each other. Judging from the international experience, the media put impacts on the jurisdiction mainly through their influence on the juror when jury system is implemented in England and in America. The jury has independent right, which cannot be interfered by the outer powers. Thus, it maximally protect the free press and the right of the defendant. In Germany and in Japan, there is no such jury system in England and in America, they believe in the judge and in their discretional judgments. So they do not worry that the media will influence the judges. However, in Japan, they insist with Constitutional concept from USA that the media should "com...