Abstract
The belief that the Chinese are generally nonlitigious people has been remarkably popular in the English literature. It is argued that, due to cultural preferences and organizational arrangements, the Chinese are socialized to perceive and solve social conflict in a particularly “Chinese way.” One organization that has received special attention is the people’s mediation committee, a so-called “mass organization” that is organized by the local residents to resolve their own daily disputes. For critics of the system, the mediation committee represents the omnipotent state penetrating into people’s everyday lives. For its sympathizers, it provides an ideal model for community justice. Regardless of whether observers condone or condemn China’s mediation system, it is generally agreed that, as an alternative to state law, the committee profoundly influences order in Chinese society.
Ironically, just when the West is searching for an alternative dispute resolution and heralding the value of community justice, China is following the path of Western legal order by moving to institutionalize popular justice and formalize public participation. The purpose of this paper is to examine how mediation committees have changed or remained the same in post-Mao China. Part I identifies conditions central to the success of people’s mediation in Mao’s China; Part II discusses the cultural and structural changes in Chinese society since the late 1970s and how these changes have impacted the mediation committee; Part III introduces a debate among Chinese legal academics and practitioners regarding the position of people’s mediation in the new political order; finally, Part IV examines a new system of dispute resolution introduced by the government – private contract.