The Limits Of Public: Between Media Supervision And Judicial

With the development of society, the gradual deepening of judicial reform, people’s awareness of the rule of law is more and more strong, people paid more attention to the case of not only confined to the trial results, pay more attention to the process of trial is also more and more high, the media plays an important role in the time. The media is the carrier of information, through the information reported to make people aware of the circumstances of the case, the media has an important influence in all aspects of social life. Judicial activities should be open to the media, accept the supervision of the public, this is the judicial public request, also is in line with the rule of law, to meet the requirements of the socialist concept of rule of law. People through media reports to understand the circumstances of the case, we can have a better understanding of the facts of the case, the supervision of the judiciary. However, the relationship between the media and the judiciary is complex, our country does not have perfect laws and regulations to regulate The media supervision, supervision of the media staff does not require, and judicial reform in our country is not mature enough, can not be completely free of outside interference, the face of the pressure of public opinion can not be strong to remain independent judgment.The contradictions in this context will have the media and the judiciary, the cause of this contradiction mainly are: first, the judicial trial is neutral, there is a tendency of media reports. This is because of the judiciary and media responsibility, the nature of the judicial organ is determined by the judicial organs in the trial process is to the judge should remain neutral, avoid leaning to either side be a fair trial case. Media reports in the case will often have their own views, will be exposed to mobilize public sentiment of social responsibility, tendency of humanistic care and compassion vulnerable groups. Comment on the moral standards are often used to legal issues, published one sidedness review. Second, the judicial process is relatively closed, the media information is public. Judicial activity is in a relatively closed space in professional activities, involving state secrets, personal Trial and reported in which is in addition to the privacy of the public announcement, the other is the judicial activities is not open to the public, in order to protect the party’s interests, to ensure that the case of independent trial. Media is mainly through public judicial process, the case for criticism, suggestions, so that the judicial organs of the activities are subject to supervision. Media reports in order to attract the general public concern, the public of the case to generate ideas and comments aroused public sympathy. Third, the media reported the case to the judge’s personal behavior will have reported that even in order to achieve the purpose of the conduct of judges do not true, it will judge individual cases of adverse effects.It can be seen, this asymmetry of information will lead to the judicial public and media supervision between the lack of coordination, this coordination will affect social stability, therefore, should achieve a harmony and balance by formulating relevant measures to make the media and the judiciary. China has no news law, shall supervise the conduct of relevant laws and regulations specification for media, the scope of media supervision strictly limited. Supervision Specification of the media, the media to improve their own quality of staff, the media reported behavior. To expand the judicial openness degree, strengthen the judiciary information public awareness. The only way to better play the function of media, but also contributes to the interference the judicial activity from the media, legal justice can really achieve.