Internal Contradictions of Judicial Mediation in China

Judicial mediation in China represents an extreme case of integration between adjudication and mediation. Based on ethnographic work and extensive interviews, this article studies how judicial mediation actually works in China. It finds that the incorporation of mediation as part of the official tri...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Law & social inquiry 2014-03, Vol.39 (2), p.285-312
Main Authors: Ng, Kwai Hang, He, Xin
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Alternative dispute resolution
Attorneys
Conflict
Defendants
Ethnography
Judges
Judges & magistrates
Judicial system
Judiciary
Justice
Litigants
Mediation
Peoples Republic of China
Plaintiffs
Principles
Role Conflict
Social Integration
Social law
Trials
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Judicial mediation in China represents an extreme case of integration between adjudication and mediation. Based on ethnographic work and extensive interviews, this article studies how judicial mediation actually works in China. It finds that the incorporation of mediation as part of the official trial process creates a set of internal contradictions. In addition to the role conflict inherent in a judge's acting also as a mediator, adjudication and mediation stages are organized by different principles. When the rather rigid format of adjudication is carried over to in-trial mediation, it curtails the flexible, nonlegalistic approach that mediation is meant to promote. Challenged authority, an uncontrolled process, narrowed issues, and weakened norms all make a settled outcome difficult to achieve. In comparison with judicial mediation in other jurisdictions, this case study from China has important theoretical implications for understanding the limits of informal justice.
ISSN:0897-6546
1747-4469
1545-696X
DOI:10.1111/lsi.12034