On The Negative Impact Of Network Public Opinion On Judicial Adjudication And The Coping Mechanisms

With the popularity of the network and people’s rising enthusiasm for participating inthe democratic politics, the influence of network public opinion has been more and moreprominent. Also in the field of justice, increasingly strong network public opinion on theintervention of the judicial activities has been a fait accompli. As a newly emerging form ofsupervision, network public opinion contributes to avoiding judicial corruption and promotingthe legal construction. Meanwhile, network public opinion in our country is immature, forinstance, absence of network civilization, network violence, popularity of network trial, andso on. All that results from imperfection of related legal regulation, poor legal knowledge ofpeople who are likely misled and exploited by malicious. Besides, the administration ofjustice in our country has deficiencies in system or handling cases. Therefore, a strongnetwork public opinion inevitably has impact on the independence of the judicial trial. Whileplaying the positive role of the network supervision by public opinion on judicial activities,we should pay more attention to the negative impact it produces to. This thesis starts from thepresent situation of network public opinion and contradiction between it and judicialimpartiality; finally provides coping mechanisms basing on the judiciary itself’s deficienciesand purifying the internet environment of public opinion.The text of this thesis mainly contains four parts. For the first part, it’s an overview ofnetwork public opinion and judicial adjudication. The author Summarizes the concept ofnetwork public opinion and its’ characteristics：the timeliness of transmission, the looseness ofits’ subjects and perspectives; and the relationship of the network public opinion and theadministration of justice. For the second part, the author analyzes the current situation of thenetwork supervision by public opinion on Justice and put out the problems of its own:lackness of network civilization, network violence, and network public opinion is not exactlyequal to the public opinion. For the third part, through the value analysis of laws, empiricalanalysis and theoretical analysis, the author studies on the negative impact. By this it comes toa conclusion that irrational network public opinion affects the independence of the judiciary,exacerbating the judicial crisis of confidence. The reasons are: firstly, the historical originsand institutional traditions: for the traditional unity of administration and judicial powers in our country,” judicial independence" has been always subjected to the impact of all aspectsfactors. Secondly, the Court itself inadequate: like judicial corruption to some degree, lowoverall quality of judicial officers, not in place for judicial information disclosure and so on.And finally, the network media’s low literacy, and the soundless network regulations. Bythese above, for the fourth part, the author puts forward the coping mechanisms: firstly, bysafeguarding the independence of the judiciary, improving the professionalism of judicialofficers, building the communication to network public opinion to promote judiciary to makerational face of network public opinion. Secondly, by strengthening the self-regulation anddiscipline of network media, enhancing the netizens’ legal awareness and media literacy,building a harmonious Forum to create a harmonious and orderly supervision by publicopinion environment. Thirdly, we should strive to make positive interaction between networksupervision by public opinion and the administration of justice. At the same time, we shouldbuild the “consultations of justice "conception in face of network Cases. The third and fourthparts are the core section of this thesis.