Realization Of Supervision Right Of Public Opinion In The Administ Of Justice

The extent to which Li’s case drew the attention from the general public can be attributed to people’s suspicion whether Li’s privileged family background and upbringing environment will pose a threat to the application of legal equality. Based on such suspicion, the public pay close attention on Li’s case, following any single piece of information about the case, in a hope to maximize their rights to know. The right to know is the precondition for the exercise of consensus supervision right, which means that the exercise of latter requires Li’s case be fully disclosed. However, in addition to Li’s special "identity background, " there are two other points we need to look into in this case. First, Li was a juvenile when committed a crime, hence heard in private session to protect minors’privacy applies to this case; second, it is a rape case and therefore pertaining to the protection of the right to sexual privacy of the victim. The realization of consensus supervision right entails the disclosure of factual information while the right of privacy requires keeping some information in private; therefore, the exercise of consensus supervision right and the protection of right of privacy constitute two conflicting factors in this case.The consensus supervision right is one of the fundamental rights of citizens endowed by law, and in Li’s case, the society has witnessed an unprecedented level of eagerness on the part of the general public to perform their supervision right. That is because, under the current judicial environment where some courts and judges harbor wrong judicial concept, some judges lack judicial competence and judicial corruption and malpractice occur from time to time, it is evitable that people shall be inclined to question the judicial credibility. Under the social atmosphere of such inclination of questioning, people tend to give more concerns to this event as a way to prevent the erosion of power and money on justice and to promote the exercise of justice through the right of consensus supervision. It is in such a way that Li’s case has caused the outpour of public opinion from the whole society.The exercise of consensus supervision right plays a significant role in supervision and circumscription of public right privatization, control and prevention of power corruption and enforcement of judicial organizations and staff to handle case according to law so as to realize criminal and judicial justice. Thus, the social reality calls for the consensus supervision right of the public and the press. The final verdict of the trial demonstrates the achievement of legal equality in Li’s case, but without the exercise of consensus supervision right of the general public, we have every reason to doubt whether such achievement can be made. In spite of this, we cannot ignore the fact that due to a variety of reasons, "consensus trial" tends to play a big part in trial of important cases, which even competes against the justice of law. Moreover, the consensus supervision when crossing a certain line is apt to harm the right of privacy. Li’s case is both a minor crime and a rape case, which normally will be heard in private sessions to protect minor’s growth and the victim’s (usually women) privacy. But in reality, the media spares no effort to disclose the minor’s name, family, portrait and other personal information and to make public the victim Ms Yang’s personal information, and they go so far even as the romantic history and life details of Li’s parents are revealed to the public, which has caused great trouble for the people involved in this case.As an important private right, the right of privacy has a relatively clear definition and a strong legal basis, the protection of which has significant meanings in real life. However, in the current legal system of China, the right of privacy is not treated as a separate right of personality, but rather as a right of reputation, which is to say, there is no dedicated law regarding the protection of privacy right in China. Then the question pops out as how we are going to define the extent to which the right of privacy shall be appropriately protected, especially in cases where the intervention of consensus supervision right is highly wanted in the trial process. The thesis argues that a benign consensus supervision mechanism shall be established alongside the principle of prioritizing of social and public interests, safeguarding the consensus supervision right and the public’s right to know, equality of rights and duties and liability exemption if agreed by the party(ies) concerned.The establishment of a benign consensus supervision mechanism can take advantage of the positive influence of consensus supervision right without encroaching on the right of privacy, and it can be achieved through the following two ways. First, the position, rights and duties of the media in the activity of supervision shall be defined by law; second, professional ethics of the media shall be standardized. By so doing, the realization of legal equality, the exercise of consensus supervision right and the protection of privacy right can be achieved at once with the perfect harmony of social and legal effects. Hence, it becomes imperative to establish a benign consensus supervision mechanism so as to make the best of legal equality.