Website: www.snedu.gov.cn Release Date: 04-24 Source: Changjiang Daily Editor: Zhu Lei Visit: 444.
Changjiang Daily 20 1 1 (Author: Fu Xiaowei) Title: Talk about the problems behind Yao Jiaxin's case.
Yesterday morning, the Xi Intermediate People's Court made a first-instance judgment on Yao Jiaxin's intentional homicide and sentenced Yao Jiaxin to death for intentional homicide.
It should be said that the verdict of the first instance is in line with the general social and psychological expectations. In the portal survey, most voters think that Yao Jiaxin should be sentenced to death. The judgment conforms to the people's hearts to a certain extent and achieves fairness and justice within the current legal framework. But it cannot be equated with the victory of public opinion, and it is not appropriate to use words like "happy people" to describe it. After all, it was the fall of two lives, Yao Jiaxin and Zhang Miao who were killed by him. In any case, the deprivation of life should be heavy.
Judging from criminal cases, medical cases are not complicated, the facts are clear and distinguishable, the evidence chain is complete, and there are laws to follow. Even so, the public's attention to the trial of this case far exceeds that of ordinary criminal cases. Undeniably, the motive of killing, the ferocity of means and the personality characteristics of drugs are all dramatic elements that attract the public's attention, but rationally speaking, these are not enough to form such a wide influence. Looking back on the whole trial, it is not difficult to find that the trial of Yao Jiaxin's personal fate has been a platform, and what we really need to pay attention to is the thinking of legal system and judicial independence on this basis.
The core of Yao Jiaxin's case is the discussion about the existing death penalty. As far as the case is concerned, there is no abolition of the death penalty for Yao Jiaxin, and there is no room for discussion based on this. But this does not mean that the death penalty is not worth discussing. Objectively speaking, the death penalty system was established after comprehensively considering the penalty tradition, penalty concept and penalty system, and the existence or abolition of the death penalty is directly related to the overall reform of the criminal law system. Whether it is necessary to re-examine the penalty function of the death penalty from a humanitarian point of view, whether it is time to abolish the death penalty, and it should not come to an end with the dust of the verdict.
The controversy over Yao Jiaxin's case became the focus of discussion after the verdict was pronounced, such as the "passion killing theory" of defense lawyers, the "piano performance analysis" of criminal psychologists, the "suspect innocence theory" of Yao Jiaxin in some media, and the "killing face theory" of Professor Kong of Peking University. It can be seen that the Yao Jiaxin case has broken away from the single nature of criminal cases and become the "Yao Jiaxin incident". It needs to be clear that defense lawyers should not bear too much blame because of their duties. The discussion in society is whether Yao Jiaxin deserves to die. If there is no special interest behind it, it should be regarded as a part of freedom of speech, and the speaker is not guilty. Of course, whether some speeches are appropriate and rational still needs to be fully analyzed. What is terrible is not that society is arguing about a topic of common concern, but that it is trying too hard to suppress normal discussion. Of course, judges should have their own independence, but this does not mean that cases can only be tried by judges and cannot be discussed by society.
Some people are worried about the excessive intervention of public opinion, and think that public opinion may damage the independence of the judiciary. It is true that judicial trials cannot be influenced by public opinion, especially by irrational "violent public opinion". However, we should also realize that laws based on public opinion cannot completely ignore public opinion. Judging from some sensational cases in recent years, public opinion has played a role in protecting justice in the trial of specific cases. Under the current situation that the judiciary is not completely independent, public opinion often plays a role of checks and balances and blocks the possible influence of other powers on judicial trials. At present, the most important problem of China's judicature is not that it is interfered by too much public opinion, but that it cannot get rid of the interference of other powers. On the contrary, public opinion is often used by both sides, so people don't know where the real public opinion is. For example, in cases such as Qiu Xinghua and Ma Jiajue, "people are extremely angry" is used as a reason to make quick judgments. However, in cases such as speeding in Hangzhou and beating people on Li campus, people are worried that public opinion will affect the administration of justice. In Yao Jiaxin's case, there was even a strange phenomenon that the court issued 500 questionnaires to selectively understand public opinion.
Although Yao Jiaxin's case was decided in the first instance, the reflection on the current judicial situation in China is far from fruitful.