On The Relationship Between Public Opinion And Judiciary

In the process of reform of China’s judicial system, the deviation from the institutionalization of the judicial process and public demand and cognitive, both consensus reduced the judicial process, lack of public recognition and support。In view of this, in March2010, Henan Province, the court in the province the full implementation of the people of the jury trial mode, the local judicial policy aim is both to broaden the public communication channels of expression, to enable the people to judge right and wrong, broken right and wrong, to promote judicial democracy, popular, and enhance the transparency of the judicial process, but also makes the civil rights people to know, understand and supervision of justice。The Justice Policy seeks to improve the credibility of the justice, in order to bridge the rift between the judicial and social needs of the public to expand the basis of judicial opinion.Explore people’s jury is trying to achieve, should clarify the relationship between public opinion and judicial. Firstly, we must first analyze the identification of public opinion under the judicial perspective; Secondly, the mechanism of judicial cases expression of public opinion, for the cases of public expression of the path has a clear understanding. Direction to solve the problem is to grasp the tensions between public opinion and the judicial status quo, the rational treatment of public opinion, and analysis resulting in a unique public opinion expression mechanism of the existing problems and causes, as a basis for analysis of specific problem-solving. The above analysis strategy, but also to explore Henan People’s jury trial mode effective analysis tool.The way the practice of the people’s jury trial of its own public opinion and orderly access to the judicial procedures of the device. Contrast to common law jury system, the civil law in judging cases, the people of the jury in the process, the function of positioning, the positioning of the judiciary and to absorb the public composed of the judicial organization, intended to be specialized, professional legal person’s intellectual and ordinary people with life experience to be integrated, making the judge of the court of public opinion can interact, communicate, and to avoid the administration of justice from the tendency of society.Follow the above ideas, this article is divided into four parts, to explore people’s jury trial opinion ordered into the mechanisms of justice and improve the institutional design of the way of people’s jury trial. The first part of the concern the identification of public opinion. Firstly, the analysis of the characteristics of current Chinese society and public opinion expression, understanding of the performance of public opinion. Secondly, the emphasis on the public recognition should be departure from the judicial cases, the formation of he correct entry point of judicial consideration of public opinion.The second section describes the mechanism of expression of public opinion in the judicial cases. First of all, the path and the dynamics of public opinion in the case into the judicial, is a description of reality. Secondly, the significance of public opinion into the justice and obstacles, based on the results of the analysis for the description of the reality. Third, the analysis of the reasons for the opinion of disorder into the judicial reasons to explain the status quo of the public confusion.The third part of Henan People’s jury the public opinion and orderly attempt to enter the administration of justice. Firstly, the scope of application of the people’s jury cases; Secondly, the people members of the jury process; Thirdly, the jury’s functional orientation; on the problems of the jury. In fact the Court of Henan Province to implement the people’s jury trial implementation for the public to enter the device of judicial proceedings.The fourth part of the administration of justice from the public opinion due processes point of view, study and improve the people’s jury system. Firstly, the analysis clear the people of the jury for the types of cases; Secondly, the people’s jury members selected from the limit ’to the universal doctrine; and thirdly, to give the litigants the right to choose to apply to the jury of the people; Finally, the integration of the people of the jury the group deliberating a case, the relationship between the results with the administration of justice opinions to be further elaborated.