Study On Conflict And Coordination Of The Internet Public Opinion And The Judicial Judgment

Traditional media due to lack of channels to judicial activities and at the same time,the network itself has a two-way transmission of information superiority, so the networkis more loved by the people, to become an important platform to comment judicial casesand oversee the activities of judicial trial. Online public opinion has also become animportant way of public oversight of the administration of justice, under the supervisionof public opinion in the network, the trial of the judicial cases tend to fair, just and open,in the positive interaction of the network of public opinion and the administration ofjustice, and thus to realize the judicial justice.But the network is an all-encompassing information field, and the network of publicopinion is also the most difficult to manage and control. Network public opinion as thestandard of judgment on general social morality, justice to the strict legal sense of justiceto decide cases, both differences in the criteria, coupled with the quality of the citizen isnot high, our national network of public opinion and the lack of effective regulation, aswell as contemporary judicial facing a crisis of confidence that have made the network ofpublic opinion and the administration of justice between the many contradictions andconflicts inevitably arise. Network public opinion often beyond reasonable boundaries,causing great psychological pressure to the judicial officers, interference with judicialindependence and justice. The case of Guangdong Xu Ting and Yunnan He Peng, theyhave the same nature, apply to the same law, but it is a far cry from the verdict, so that wedo not seriously consider how to effectively resolve contradictions and conflicts betweenthe network of public opinion and the administration of justice to achieve thedevelopment of network coordination between public opinion and judicial trial.Network public opinion is complex, mixed with a variety of different voices anddemands, but it can not be denied that the network point of view of the mainstream ofpublic opinion are want to expose evil, to safeguard social fairness and justice, and theycontains the desire and pursuit of justice, they represents the true voice of the people, thatbetween the network public opinion and the judicial set up a bridge to communicate witheach other. To achieve the coordinated development of the network of public opinion andjudicial adjudication, we must strengthen to strengthen the regulation of network public opinion. But to the "the network real-name system" and "legislation", the author is not apositive attitude, the network is a ghost, don’t lump the entire industry together, seemslaughable. At the same time, the judicial organs should practically strengthen the judicialtransparency, improve the judicial personnel’s overall quality, establish truly independentjudicial system. Give full play to network public opinion is positive value of justice.