File Download

There are no files associated with this item.

  Links for fulltext
     (May Require Subscription)
Supplementary

Article: Internal Contradictions of Judicial Mediation in China

TitleInternal Contradictions of Judicial Mediation in China
Authors
Issue Date2014
Citation
Law and Social Inquiry, 2014, v. 39, n. 2, p. 285-312 How to Cite?
AbstractJudicial 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. © 2013 American Bar Foundation.
Persistent Identifierhttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/251065
ISSN
2021 Impact Factor: 1.396
2020 SCImago Journal Rankings: 0.446
ISI Accession Number ID

 

DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorNg, Kwai Hang-
dc.contributor.authorHe, Xin-
dc.date.accessioned2018-02-01T01:54:28Z-
dc.date.available2018-02-01T01:54:28Z-
dc.date.issued2014-
dc.identifier.citationLaw and Social Inquiry, 2014, v. 39, n. 2, p. 285-312-
dc.identifier.issn0897-6546-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/251065-
dc.description.abstractJudicial 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. © 2013 American Bar Foundation.-
dc.languageeng-
dc.relation.ispartofLaw and Social Inquiry-
dc.titleInternal Contradictions of Judicial Mediation in China-
dc.typeArticle-
dc.description.naturelink_to_subscribed_fulltext-
dc.identifier.doi10.1111/lsi.12034-
dc.identifier.scopuseid_2-s2.0-84899914591-
dc.identifier.volume39-
dc.identifier.issue2-
dc.identifier.spage285-
dc.identifier.epage312-
dc.identifier.eissn1747-4469-
dc.identifier.isiWOS:000335986900001-
dc.identifier.issnl0897-6546-

Export via OAI-PMH Interface in XML Formats


OR


Export to Other Non-XML Formats