新媒体环境下律师网络言行的生成逻辑与规范治理

Abstract
Figure/Table
References
Related Citation (2)

Download: PDF (611 KB) HTML (1 KB)
Export: BibTeX | EndNote (RIS)

Abstract Although all sectors of society are advocating the establishment of legal profession community, there are still hierarchical order, competition and confrontation among legal personnel, especially the differentiation and tension, competition and game between lawyers and judicial officials, which are often presented in online public space in the form of new media narration. Compared with traditional media, new media realizes direct communication and interaction between the author and the reader, in which the lawyer has more advantages than in court. In order to break the existing power pattern in the legal profession and reshape discourse order, many lawyers take new media as a pubic platform to compete for the right of speech for their profession and construct the image of legal spokesmen. However, some lawyers’ abuse of new media makes the competition and game within the legal profession unable to be carried out within a specific rule framework, which has a negative impact on the normal operation of judicial power, the image and reputation of legal personnel, and the legitimate rights and interests of litigants. Therefore, it is necessary to set a specific bottom line for lawyers’ online words and deeds on the premise of guaranteeing their freedom of speech, so as to realize the “reconciliation” between judicial officials and lawyers and avoid possible risks due to excessive regulation.

Key words： new media lawyers’ online words and deeds; professional differentiation discourse competition regulation and governance

Received: 25 July 2019

PACS:

DF85

	Service

	E-mail this article
	Add to my bookshelf
	Add to citation manager
	E-mail Alert
	RSS
	Articles by authors
	YANG Li-min

Cite this article:

YANG Li-min. Generation Logic and Regulation of Lawyers’ Online Words and Deeds in New Media Environment[J]. , 2019, 36(5): 101-111.

URL:

https://xb.szu.edu.cn/EN/ OR https://xb.szu.edu.cn/EN/Y2019/V36/I5/101

[1] 吴英女,沈阳,周琴.微博意见领袖网络行为——“净网”前后的数据分析[J].新闻记者,2014,(1):29-35.
[2] 封安波. 论转型社会的媒体与刑事审判[J].中国法学,2014,(1):63-78.
[3] Sida Liu, Terence C.Halliday. Criminal Defense in China: The Politics of Lawyers at Work[M].Cambridge: Cam-bridge University Press,2016.144.
[4] 杭州保姆纵火案的舆情报告[EB/OL].https://www.eefung.com/hot-report/20170707153659.2017-07-07.
[5] 顾培东. 当代中国司法生态及其改善[J].中国法学,2016,(2):23-41.
[6] 季卫东. 大变局下的中国法治[M].北京:北京大学出版社,2013.186-188.
[7] 强世功. 法律共同体宣言[J].中外法学,2001,(3):328-339.
[8] (美)理查德·A·波斯纳.超越法律[M].苏力译.北京:中国政法大学出版社,2001.39,45-46.
[9] 刘思达.分化的律师业与职业主义建构[J].中外法学,2005,(4):.
[10] 田文昌、蒋惠岭、陈瑞华.本是同源生,相济匡公正:化解法官与律师冲突,共筑法律职业共同体[J].中国法律评论,2015,(3):1-23.
[11] (法)皮埃尔·布迪厄.法律的力量:迈向司法场域的社会学[J].强世功译.北大法律评论,1999,(2):496-545.
[12] 苏力.苏力评张扣扣案律师辩护词:法律辩护应基于案情和事实！[EB/OL].https://mp.weixin.qq.com/s/xPkRdp5Kfsawf7vapT7_AQ.2019-07-19.
[13] 周永坤.请给律师一条活路[EB/OL].https://mp.weixin.qq.com/s/1hRR0sJhicR4HyLHTwwsYw.2019-07-20.
[14] 童之伟.评张扣扣案及律师辩护词:应容忍和支持刑辩律师正常执业[EB/OL].http://iolaw.cssn.cn/fxyjdt/201907/t20190726_4939727.shtml. 2019-07-25.
[15] (美)理查德·戴维斯.最高法院与媒体[M].于宵译.上海:上海三联书店,2014.8-9.
[16] 程竹汝. 传媒的公共问责功能与司法独立[J].政治与法律,2002,(3):3-9.
[17] 孙笑侠. 司法的政治力学——民众、媒体、为政者、当事人与司法官的关系分析[J].中国法学,2011,(2):57-69.
[18] 谢澍. 自媒体时代的审判信息公开——以刑事司法为视角的实证研究[J].上海政法学院学报(法治论丛),2013,(1):9-17.
[19] 陈有西.北海案在法治方面的八个意义[EB/OL].http://blog.sina.com.cn/s/blog_6b804b510101jkpn.html. 2018-10-24.
[20] (美)迪特里希·鲁施迈耶.律师与社会:美德两国法律职业比较研究[M].于宵译.上海:上海三联书店,2014. 68.
[21] 孙笑侠等. 法律人之治——法律职业的中国思考[M].北京:中国政法大学出版社,2005.323-329.
[22] (德)马克斯·韦伯.学术与政治[M].冯克利译.上海:上海三联书店,1999.63-67.
[23] 李学尧. 法律职业主义[J].法学研究,2005,(6):3-19.
[24] 门金玲.从“律师退庭”事件看辩审冲突[EB/OL].http://www.legaldaily.com.cn/Lawyer/content/2018-01/16/content_7449061.htm?node=75895.2018-01-16.
[25] 王亚中.是英雄还是讼棍?论杭州保姆纵火案律师的自杀式辩护[EB/OL].https://weibo.com/ttarticle/p/show?id=2309404187530705643883.2017-12-21.
[26] 白杰戈.杭州纵火案保姆律师被立案调查,党琳山:离庭不是一时冲动[EB/OL].http://china.cnr.cn/yaowen/20171224/t20171224_524073701.shtml.2017-12-24.
[27] (美)玛丽·安·格伦顿.法律人统治下的国度——法律职业危机如何改变美国社会[M].沈国琴,胡鸿雁译.北京:中国政法大学出版社,2010.62-64,78.
[28] 程金华. 中国律师择业理性分析——以业务收费为核心的实证研究[J].法学,2012,(11):143-155.
[29] 盛雷鸣、彭辉、史建三.中国(上海)自由贸易试验区建立对法律服务业的影响[J].法学,2013,(11):122-131.
[30] 叶竹盛. 死磕派律师[J].南风窗,2013,(18):82-83.
[31] 周明海. 微博中的律师——基于新浪微博的实证研究[J].法治论坛,2013,(2):315-319.
[32] 杨学林.死磕派律师的那一袋红薯啊[EB/OL].http://blog.sina.com.cn/s/blog_6592426a0102e4ko.html.2018-10-23.
[33] 王亚中.党律师退庭事件是中国法律界的一面照妖镜！[EB/OL].http://m.kdnet.net/share-12563389.html.2017-12-26.
[34] 王亚中.如果党琳山律师不掀桌子,杭州保姆纵火案会有什么下场?[EB/OL].https://weibo.com/ttarticle/p/show?id=2309404187894741885921.2017-12-22.
[35] 杭州保姆案:杨金柱出卖同行,党琳山自取其辱[EB/OL].https://www.sohu.com/a/216683342_826874.2018-01 -14.
[36] 兰荣杰. 刑辩律师维护当事人利益的行为界限[J].交大法学,2018,(2):38-49.
[37] (法)阿历克西·德·托克维尔.论美国民主[M].董果良译.北京:商务印书馆,1988.309.
[38] 贺莉丹.李某某案律师陷超限战[N].21世纪经济报道,2013-09-04.
[39] 陈瑞华. 协商和妥协的艺术[J].中国律师,2018,(5):81-83.
[40] 朱兵强、丰楠.维稳与网络时代律师庭外言论的治理[J].电子政务, 2017,(8):41-49.
[41] 高一飞、潘基俊.论律师媒体宣传的规则[J].政法学刊,2010,(2):5-13.
[42] 胡田野. 新媒体时代律师庭外言论的规制[J].法学,2014,(1):3-9.
[43] 夏燕. 自媒体时代律师网络言论规制研究[J].四川理工学院学报(社会科学版),2017,(3):37-52.
[44] 韩旭. 《刑法修正案(九)》实施后如何善待律师权利——兼论泄露案件信息罪和扰乱法庭秩序罪的理解与适用[J].法治研究,2015,(6):53-60.
[45] 王永杰. 论辩护权法律关系的冲突与协调——以杭州保姆放火案辩护律师退庭事件为切入[J].政治与法律,2018,(10):153-161.
[46] 侯健.媒体介入不会干扰司法公正[N].文汇报,2011-09-19(010).
[47] 李奋飞. 论“表演性辩护”——中国律师法庭辩护功能的差异化及其矫正[J].政法论坛,2015,(3):77-92.
[48] 周强.让审判与舆论良性互动[EB/OL].http://opinion.people.com.cn/n/2013/0530/c1003-21666393.html.2013- 05-30.