Settlement Of Public Opinion In Judicial Decisions

Public opinion and judicature are not new topics,but new forms of expression in the new era.On the one hand,it has become a fact that public opinion has intervened in the judicial system.We have observed the public's involvement in judicial cases.To the "anti-killing" case of Wang Lang and the Case of Yu Huan,the public's active discussion on justifiable defense;Then,the public's discussion on "persuasion or not" caused by the first-instance judgment of sudden death caused by smoking;In a series of cases,such as the "don't chase" thinking in the death of a runaway,we can find that the expression of public opinion promotes justice as a whole.On the other hand,with the continuous development of information technology,it has led to the adjustment of the pattern of interests and the reform of the economic system,which makes new things and problems emerge in an endless stream.However,due to the constraints of social economy and social mainstream values at that time,legislative public opinion is at a loss when facing new problems.At this time,the public opinion involved should no longer be ignored.Therefore,how to place public opinion,that is,how to input the procedural nature of public opinion into judicial judgment,has become a topic that contemporary scholars should think about.First of all,it expounds on "public opinion".It is a very difficult task to define the concept of "public opinion".There are also far more than 10 species in China.Public opinion research originated from western countries,based on some representative opinions of scholars both at home and abroad on the basis of systematic,respectivelyfrom the aspects such as subject,object and ontology of the word "public opinion" has carried on the analysis of the so-called "public opinion",is a person around a certain topics,expresses the opinion,attitude,and the issue may involve some kind of social phenomenon,also may be associated with an event,a policy.For,on the one hand,unless there is a plebiscite,it is difficult to judge accurately the "majority";On the other hand,diverse and rich values have become the symbol of modern society.In general,whether an opinion is mainstream or influential is not determined by the number of people who advocate it.The key lies in the position and ability of the group advocating it in the society.Therefore,the subject of public opinion may be either the majority or the minority or even the individual.This paper makes a conceptual distinction between public opinion and general will,public opinion and public opinion,and expounds the relevant classification of public opinion,aiming to make readers have a clearer understanding of the word "public opinion".Nowadays,with the rapid development of the Internet and the deepening of the rule of law,public opinion not only has the traditional characteristics of irrationality and instability,but also has a new characteristic in combination with The Times--more diversified expression carriers.As a new way for the public to participate in politics,the evolution of public opinion is becoming more fragmented,and the sense of rules has become the dominant point of controversy.Secondly,this paper takes the judicial cases concerned by the public in the three years from 2017 to 2019 as the research sample,aiming to find out the types and characteristics of judicial cases concerned by the public.Can be found through the analysis of the sample,although people every year the focus of the judicial case is just the tip of the iceberg of the court accepted cases each year,from 2017 to 2019,however,people pay attention to the absolute number of judicial case itself in multiply,from its growth trend and social impact has been caused,either practice or theory researchers,can't underestimate this part of the overall accounted for a small case.The cases of the status of the powerful and the moral conflict have always been the focus of public attention.In recent years,the attention of juvenile cases,including crimes against minors and juvenile crimes,has increased rapidly.Public safetyemergencies have also become a hot topic in recent years,such as food safety,steering wheel grabbing,throwing objects at high altitude and random killing.In addition,cases involving new things on the basis of the Internet have undoubtedly become hot topics for people at home and abroad,such as the didi Hitch murder in Leqing,Zhejiang province,the illegal fund-raising case of "Ezubao",and the first case of the organization brushing into the criminal case.At present,when several kinds of cases are integrated,the public's attention is even higher,such as the child molestation case of the chairman of Xiecheng,the status of an official and the involvement of minors.As soon as the case is disclosed,the public immediately explodes.Through the analysis of the cases concerned by the public,it can be found that these cases either have illegal judgments or commutation of sentences,or there are cases where the sentences are too light,too heavy,or contain legal conflicts.Third,public opinion is not a justification for justice.In the process of judicial judgment,the reason that can serve as the main premise of the judgment can only be the justification reason.Judging by justifying reasons can not only realize the purpose of finding the judgment result,but also make the judgment result legitimate.This is determined by the nature of the justification.The reason why a reason for action can be a justification,or satisfy a moral merit;Or in the case of moral disagreement,it can overcome that disagreement and become a solid basis for discussion.In terms of public opinion itself,it does not necessarily have moral merits.On the one hand,public opinion is not necessarily a good opinion or attitude.On the other hand,although there are some "good" opinions and attitudes in public opinion,the public opinion is originally a good opinion and attitude with moral merits.It is not because of public recognition that it has this characteristic.Second,public opinion does not meet the second requirement.The formation process of public opinion is unstable,and its content itself is unstable.Therefore,it cannot serve as the premise of stability in the process of legal reasoning.This makes it impossible for public opinion to be a legitimate reason and give full play to its legitimate ability.However,through the sample analysis above,it can be found that public opinion has its independent value for judicial judgment,which can promote the filing and trial procedure of some cases,make the result of case handling more reasonable and fair,and make the proceedings more open and fair.In a word,the expression of public opinion on the whole promotes judicial justice and improves judicial credibility.Therefore,how to give full play to the positive role of public opinion and make its procedural input into judicial judgment become a current issue.Finally,the article puts forward the specific path of judicial settlement of public opinion.The people's assessors are from the masses and represent the masses.As a symbol of "the people being the masters of the country",the people's assessors received unanimous attention from party and government departments after the founding of new China,and provided corresponding legal guarantees in the Constitution of the People's Republic of China and the Organic Law of the People's Courts of the People's Republic of China.The system has been moving forward with twists and turns,and the existing problems are constantly emerging,such as the absence of national laws,"to accompany but not to examine","to examine but not to discuss" and so on.In order to solve these problems,50 pilot courts nationwide started a three-year pilot reform in April 2015,and successfully passed the People's Jury Law of the People's Republic of China on April 27,2018.In order to ensure the substantive participation of the people's assessors in the trial,the Law stipulates the distinction between the fact trial and the legal trial by the people's assessors under the seven-member collegial panel,that is,the people's assessors independently express their opinions on the fact finding and vote together with the judge,but they have only the right to say but not the right to vote on the application of the law.However,in theory,the fact trial and the legal trial are so harmonious that it is difficult to distinguish them.In practice,the specific operation mode has not been unified,and it is in the stage of "crossing the river by feeling the stones".Based on the exploration of overseas experience and the pilot experience of 50 pilot courts in the past three years,the paper suggests formulating rules of fact finding,making a list of cases,and improving the supporting mechanism-judge instruction system.The system of amicus curiae plays an active role in the refinement of public opinion and provides a good platform for the procedural input of public opinion.Reviewing China's judicial systemand phenomena,such as expert opinion,expert opinion and the third party system of administrative litigation,are very similar to the Amicus system in design concept.Therefore,it is a good measure to find out the deficiencies of these phenomena or systems in practice and improve them.