This article examines the two concepts of "media justice" and "just media" at the intersection of media and criminal justice. With the advent of new media, particularly digital platforms and social networks, the media's influence on public opinion in legal cases has increased unprecedentedly. This exacerbates the inherent tensions between the right to freedom of expression, the right to access information, and the principles of a fair trial, including the presumption of innocence and the right to privacy.

"Media justice" refers to the phenomenon where media coverage, relying on sensational, selective, and biased reporting, influences public opinion and can prejudice the outcome of a trial. This phenomenon can lead to a violation of the court's independence and impartiality, a weakening of the presumption of innocence, and a breach of individuals' privacy, resulting in severe psychological and social consequences such as stigmatization, penal populism, and the promotion of online vigilantism.

In contrast, "just media" addresses the constructive and positive role of media in enhancing transparency, accountability, and public awareness within the criminal justice system. This article, adopting an interdisciplinary approach, analyzes this duality from the perspective of Islamic jurisprudence and statutory law. The research findings indicate that "media justice" can weaken fundamental principles of a fair trial, such as the presumption of innocence and judicial impartiality, by creating public prejudice and pressure on judicial authorities. Conversely, "just media" plays a constructive role in exposing corruption and supervising power by promoting transparency and accountability.

This article employs a descriptive-analytical method, with data collected through library research and document analysis (laws, rulings, and jurisprudential and legal sources). The data analysis is qualitative, utilizing a content analysis approach to texts and a comparative study of concepts in jurisprudence and law.