法学专业外文翻译新闻自由与司法独立的冲突与平衡-法律法学(编辑修改稿)

法学专业外文翻译新闻自由与司法独立的冲突与平衡-法律法学(编辑修改稿)内容摘要：

for the superior judiciary of England, the threat of dismissal because the Crown did not like a particular oute, was lifted. This revolutionary achievement was to bee a model which was eventually extended to the constitutions of all other countries of the mon law. It provides the formal assurance in those countries of the type of judicial independence for which Article ICCPR stands. At first, the English were somewhat reluctant to share the prize of judicial independence with their colonies. The Declaration of Independence of the United States of America, for example, listed as one of the grievances of the American colonists against King George III that: He has made judges dependent on his Will alone, for the Tenure of their Offices, and the Amount and Payment of their Salaries. It was this experience that led James Madison, in drafting the amendments to the United States Constitution, which became the Bill of Rights of that country, to assert: Independent tribunals of justice will consider themselves in a peculiar manner the guardians of these rights。 they will be an imperable bulwark against every assumption of power in the legislature or executive。 they will be naturally led to resist every encroachment upon rights expressly stipulated for in the Constitution by the Declaration of Rights. Bad experiences led to an emerging conviction in many countries that guarantees had to be provided against the kind of governmental action that would diminish the independence of the courts: the dismissal or suspension of judges who delivered unpalatable decisions。 putting out to pasture judges who had a record of reversing government action。 leaving unfilled judicial vacancies so that courts could not properly perform their functions。 selecting weak, inpetent, corrupt and partial appointees to sit in the judicial seat。 lopping the pensions, salaries and other benefits so as to intimidate judges and to divert them from the lawful, honest and principled actions required by the proper discharge of their functions. Although there have certainly been cases of judicial weakness, partiality, cowardice and corruption (symbolized most vividly by Judge Roland Frailer who did Hitler39。 s bidding) there have been many more cases of judicial integrity, courage and principled conduct. The real test es when judges are led by their understanding of the law, the findings on the facts and the pull of conscience to a decision which is contrary to what the other branches of government or other 7 powerful interests in society want. Something different from what the home crowd wants 10 . That is when judicial independence is put to the test. In the United States, in recent times, the Supreme Court has twice, and unanimously, rejected an argument, advanced by the President, of great political importance to the most powerful officeholder of the nation. In United States v Nixon, the Court in July 1974 upheld a subpoena issued by a United States District judge, the Hon John Silica, directing President Nixon to produce, for use in a criminal proceeding, tape recordings and documents recording conversations in the White House between Nixon and his advisers. The Supreme Court included four Nixon appointees, including Chief Justice Burger who wrote the Court39。 s decision. The Court unanimously declared the law. It affirmed the subpoena. The President obeyed. He then promptly resigned from offic。