The Relationship Between Public Opinion And Judicial Trial

Public opinion could bring positive influence to the judicial trial, as well as negative influence. It is a valuable issue to research on how to promote judicial trial with public opinion each other. After introducing their conflict, this article tried to make some proposal of seeking for the balance point to Supreme Court.First, this article introduced the concept of public opinion, and introduced public opinion's formation as well as the characteristic, which are advantageous to understand clearly how the public opinion is affects the judicial trial. The public opinion has four characteristics: First, it must have a subject; Second, it should probably have the most people to express the opinion to this subject; Third, the numerous individuals have formed the uniform opinion once more to the subject; Finally, this uniform opinion can have certain influence.Then the article mainly introduced the surveillance question of public opinion to the judicial trial. First analyzed the necessity that judicial trail must accept the public opinion's supervision in jurisprudence angle, which mainly has given the elaboration from the following several angles: First, the judicial trial needs to draw support the surveillance, but the public opinion has the supervision function exactly; Second, judicial internal surveillance's limitation; Third, the public opinion supervises judicature's beneficial form. Then introduced the positive influence the public opinion to the judicial trial, which is also the Supreme Court's goal in processing supervision of public opinion question.The second part mainly elaborated the rules and regulations to the public opinion surveillance. First analyzed that Supreme Court are paying attention seriously gradually to the supervision of public opinion for several dozen years which mainly epitomized in two regulated document manifested at the end of 2009. Then this article has carried on the elaboration to these two regulated document. On the one hand, it had affirmed its public judicial information's procedure as well as proposed circumvention supervision of public opinion to judicial trial adverse effect protective measures; On the other hand, it has also criticized this stipulation to supervision of public opinion's excessively many inappropriate limits. Finally this article introduced all levels of courts dealing with it under the Supreme Court, and asked a series of questions.The third part stood in the theory angle, specifically elaborated the conflict between the supervision of public opinion and the judicial trial, including the supervision of public opinion and the jurisdiction independence, the judicature fairness, the judicial authority's conflict, and has carried on the thorough analysis to the conflict reason. The conflict between the supervision of public opinion and the judicial trial mainly manifested in two aspects: the natural repellency of jurisdiction independence to supervision of public opinion and the natural offensive of supervision of public opinion to jurisdiction independence. But the conflict between the supervision of public opinion and the judicial fairness mainly manifested in the public opinion instability which reflected for the public opinion and judicature's stabilizing with the rationality conflicts. This article not only has carried on the elaboration to these conflicts simultaneously, but also carried on concisely the analysis in the preamble to both difference's comparison foundation to the respective conflict reason. Finally facing these conflicts, this article attempts to quote the benefit balance theory to solve these conflicts, and seeks for the balanced point between the supervision of public opinion and the judicial trial.The fourth part introduced specifically the actual situation of the Supreme Court at the processing supervision of public opinion and judicial conflict's insufficiency's manifestation, mainly included lacks of the safeguard trial the public opinion disturbance safeguard mechanism, the treatment supervision of public opinion not to exist many limits, the adverse consequences existence excessive worry which possibly creates to the freedom of speech as well as has not been able to implement completely questions and so on trial public principle.The final part proposed some perfect measures to the Supreme Court. First, after limiting the supervision of public opinion behavior each kind of standard carries on the comparative analysis, and has established the standard which our country must adopt. Simultaneously profits from the overseas experience, proposed to the Supreme Court that the consummation prevents the public opinion disturbance judicature's safeguard mechanism suggestion. Finally the article proposed to the Supreme Court how to guarantee all levels of courts that can implement the trial public principle actually the suggestion. I hoped that the Supreme Court could take more reasonable processing supervision of public opinion and the judicial trial relations through these suggestions, let both of them be able to promote mutually during the mutual conflict.