影视台词 > 影评 > ：《真相至上》公民的义务与政府的权力是由微语录网(www.5yulu.com)为您精心收集，如果觉得好，请把这篇文章复制到您的博客或告诉您的朋友，以下是《真相至上》公民的义务与政府的权力的正文：

　　这部电影大概是根据1972年美国最高法院Branzburg vs. Hayes案件而改编的。当然，电影中也数次提到该案件。
　　
　　Branzburg是肯塔基州一家日报社的记者。1969到1971年之间他发表了一系列关于当地毒品泛滥的报道。其中一篇报道揭露了当地毒品团伙利用大麻树脂制取大麻的行为，同时还配了一张图片，上面有一双手正在试验台上制取大麻；在另一篇报道中，为了了解肯塔基州的毒品情况，他曾和吸毒者进行了深入的访谈。因为两篇报道，Branzburg被大陪审团传唤，要求提供毒品团伙和吸毒者的信息，但Branzburg却拒绝了，认为按照宪法第一修正案的规定，自己有出版自由言论自由的权利。官司一路打到最高法院，结果9位大法官以5:4的结果否定了Branzburg的诉求。
　　
　　大法官White否定的理由如下：
　　
　　The sole issue before us is the obligation of reporters to respond to grand jury subpoenas as other citizens do, and to answer questions relevant to an investigation into the commission of crime. Citizens generally are not constitutionally immune from grand jury subpoenas, and neither the First Amendment nor any other constitutional provision protects the average citizen from disclosing to a grand jury information that he has received in confidence.
　　
　　问题的关键在于记者是否和其他公民一样，需要应对大陪审团的传唤，回答与犯罪调查相关的问题。如果普通公民需要履行宪法规定的义务，并且第一修正案或者其他法律条款没有允许普通公民在大陪审团面前隐藏机密信息，那么也不能给予记者特殊待遇。
　　
　　线人要求匿名，正是为了隐藏自己的罪行，逃避法律的惩罚。因此法律怎么还能允许记者和线人获得赦免呢？
　　
　　然而大法官Douglas发表了不同的看法：
　　
　　In my view, a newsman has an absolute right not to appear before a grand jury, it follows for me that a journalist who voluntarily appears before that body may invoke his First Amendment privilege to specific questions. The basic issue is the extent to which the First Amendment must yield to the Government's asserted need to know a reporter's unprinted information.
　　
　　在他看来，记者拥有不出席大陪审团的绝对权力。一方面第一修正案保护言论出版自由，另一方面政府却言之凿凿需要获得一个记者未发表的信息，因此这桩案件的本质就在于到底第一修正案需要在多大程度向政府的需求让步。
　　
　　Two principles which follow from this understanding of the First Amendment are at stake here. One is that the people, the ultimate governors, must have absolute freedom of, and therefore privacy of, their individual opinions and beliefs regardless of how suspect or strange they may appear to others. Ancillary to that principle is the conclusion that an individual must also have absolute privacy over whatever information he may generate in the course of testing his opinions and beliefs... The second principle is that effective self-government cannot succeed unless the people are immersed in a steady, robust, unimpeded, and uncensored flow of opinion and reporting which are continuously subjected to critique, rebuttal, and reexamination.
　　
　　第一修正案意味着两个原则：第一，人民，作为最终的管理者，必须对自己的意见和信仰拥有绝对的自由，绝对的隐私，无论他们的意见和信仰有多么可疑或者怪异。因此个人对于在检验自己的意见和信仰的过程中所产生的信息也必须拥有绝对的隐私权……第二，人民的自我管理如果要成功，就必须使人民接触到广泛而且自由地传播的观点和报道，并且这些观点和报道可以不断地接受评价和检验。
　　
　　而今天的判决却会给信息的自由流动设置障碍。线人们将不再提供重要的信息，而记者们在下笔时也会更加谨慎。
　　
　　As the years pass, the power of government becomes more and more pervasive. It is a power to suffocate both people and causes. Those in power, whatever their politics, want only to perpetuate it. Now that the fences of the law and the tradition that has protected the press are broken down, the people are the victims.
　　
　　随着时间的流逝，政府的权力也愈发无孔不入。这权力正阻碍人民和人民的事业。当权者无论党派，只想权力永在；而保护言论的城墙却已坍塌；最终受害的将是人民。
　　
　　
作者ardai

《真相至上》公民的义务与政府的权力由微语录网(www.5yulu.com)收集整理,转载请注明出处!