Research On The Influence Of Media Public Opinion On Judicial Trial

Freedom of speech is one of the important rights stipulated in the Constitution and is the inalienable basic right of the public.The public opinion formed on the basis of the right to freedom of speech can have a huge influence on the public management of the government.Among the types of public opinion,media public opinion is one of the most rapid and influential.The public has naturally given strong attention to social hot events,one of which is the judicial trial.The relationship between media public opinion and judicial trials contains the deep mysteries of the relationship between democracy and the rule of law in modern society.Public opinion embodies the power of democracy,and justice plays an important role in the construction of the rule of law.Judicial justice requires many conditions,one of which is to deal with the relationship between media opinion and independent trial.In the current information age,more and more judicial participants have spread and amplified their voices through media public opinion,hoping to realize their greater interests in judicial trials directly or indirectly through media public opinion.Media public opinion is a double-edged sword.How to correctly treat media public opinion in judicial trials and how to make rational use of media public opinion is an important issue for judicial workers.Based on the research literature at home and abroad and the current judicial practice of the judicial organs in China,this paper studies the media paradox in judicial trials from the definition of media paradox and the formation of media paradox in judicial trial.The influence of media public opinion on judicial trials is to express the power of the public in the form of public opinion and thus affect the judicial trial;the influence path is directly affecting the judges of the case or indirectly affecting the judge through the creation of the overall atmosphere of the society;there are three types of influence results: Obey the public opinion and judge,fail to obey the public opinion judgment,and obey the public opinion and change the judgment.In view of the above-mentioned three kinds of impacts,the cases with universal social influence in recent years are analyzed,and the reasons for the formation of the three results and the role of media public opinion are deeply studied.On this basis,there are three sets of contradictions between media public opinion and judicial trials: First,the independence of judicial trials and the profit-seeking nature of media public opinion,leading to judicial trials focusing on the establishment of legal facts and the application of laws,and media public opinion The truth of the facts and the rationality of the moral level;the second is the information asymmetry between the judicial department and the media,the particularity of the judicial work makes the media public opinion unable to fully obtain all the information of the case,and the judicial organs and media public opinion on the case information.There are also huge differences in the method and extent of adoption;the third is the deviation of legal understanding between legal practitioners and non-legal practitioners,especially in terms of legal procedures.Based on the research literature at home and abroad and the current judicial practice of the judiciary in China,this paper studies the media public opinion in the judicial trial from the definition of media public opinion and the status quo of media public opinion affecting the judicial trial.The influence way of media public opinion on judicial trial is to show the public power in the form of public opinion and thus influence judicial trial;the influence way is to directly affect the judge of the case or indirectly influence the judge through the construction of the overall social atmosphere;there are three types of influence results: obedient to public opinion,not obedient to public opinion,obedient to public opinion and change judgment,and in-depth study of three results The formation of the reasons and the role of media public opinion.On this basis,the analysis of the impact of media public opinion on judicial trial can be divided into positive and negative.The positive impact of media public opinion on justice includes feedback,supervision and broadcasting.These positive effects come from the publicity and neutrality of media public opinion,so that it can represent public opinion and supervise judicial activities.Of course,the media public opinion also has a negative effect on the judicial trial,because of the different interest starting point,information acquisition point and legal understanding point between the two,resulting in the following contradictions: the judicial trial focuses on the establishment of legal facts and the application of law,the media public opinion focuses on the truth of the case and the rationality of the moral level;the information between the judicial department and the media is not Symmetrical,the particularity of judicial work makes the media public opinion unable to fully obtain all the information of the case,and there are huge differences in the way and degree of the judicial organ and the media public opinion's acceptance of the case information;there is a deviation of legal understanding between legal practitioners and non legal practitioners.The contradiction between media public opinion and judicial trial naturally exists,and from the perspective of judicial practice,the impact of media public opinion on the judiciary is mostly negative,but media public opinion and judicial trial are not irreconcilable.We should establish a perfect management mechanism so that the media public opinion can operate in a scientific framework,through the reasonable intervention of the government and strengthening the self-discipline of the media industry,so that the media can fully function,the public opinion supervises the fairness and rationality of the judicial trial,guarantees the fairness and justice,improves the judicial credibility of the court and the judge,and promotes the comprehensive rule of law.