Restriction On Open Justice

Open Justice is stipulated in Article 10 of the current Chinese Civil Procedure Law.Also the principle of Open Justice is considered as one of the basic principles in civil procedure law.Notwithstanding this aspect,the Open Justice is to some degree in conflict over some principles in the Civil Law.Sometimes,Open Justice even degenerates the Civil Procedure Law as an appendix subordinating to the Criminal Procedure Law.Theoretically,Open Justice is far from enough to act as a basic principle in Civil Procedure Law.In my humble opinion,we should specially slow down the pace of judicial reforming in Open Justice among all the judicial reform in China.This thesis is divided into four parts.The first section is an overview on Open Justice.First discussed why Open Justice should be stipulated in all three Procedure Laws and narrated that Open Justice should be a right for the defendant initially generated from the Constitution.Second introduced the evolutionary history of Open Justice in China and abroad,emphasizing on the historical events in German.In the second section,I introduced the New “Open Justice Theory” in the academic field of Civil Procedure and Constitution,anticipating the tendency of Open Justice.Also I have analyzed why it is difficult and meaningless to find the balance between Open Justice and the right of Privacy.I have listed Some Clauses restricting Open Justice.At last,I have drawn a conclusion that Open justice is not applicable neither Criminal Procedure Law nor Civil Procedure Law.In the third section,I have reasoned why is photo taking,as well as video shooting prohibited from the courtroom internationally and how it is related to the principle of Open Justice.I have also Raised a question whether taking notes on or sketching the ongoing hearing shall be prohibited as a way of recording as well as video shooting and photo taking.I have also analyzed the Right of Courtroom Observation in detail via a very well-known case,Reppeta vs Japan.I have also introduced the freedom of speech,taking notes in the court and collecting information.In the fourth section,I have drawn a blueprint on Open Justice: the right of Courtroom Observation shall be much more restricted.One case of the Media influencing the proceeding is introduced,in the case,one journalist attended a Court Hearing and published an article detrimental to the defendant.A suggestion was made that P.R.C should absorb the experience of the U.S that the Judge should have the right to lift gagging order for the purpose of protecting the privacy of both parties in civil proceedings.Also we should clarify the meaning of “Privacy” in legislation.