Marxist Sociology Of Law Perspective Society Organizations For Dispute Empirical Analysis

Nowadays, China's core issue doesn't lie in its social problems, but rather in the resolution of these problems as well as the choice of approaches, for these two aspects determine China's future development:whether its situation becomes more problematic, severe and acute, or these social problems can be solved in a more mature and self-adjusting manner. This paper intends to provide the rational and non-violent dispute resolution with a social operation mechanism that well adapts to China's traditional legal culture and her practical social structure. Meanwhile, the author points out that through analyzing and dealing with this social aspect, we can build a social organization system according with the civil society, which is the very prerequisite and condition of China's progressive political reform.The basic principle of Marxism sociology of law provides us with a theoretic pattern of nation-society-legislation. This pattern suggests that people should draw from social practice the dispute resolution; and from the latter, get reflections on the defect of the social structure. Meanwhile, disputes can be coped with through interactions between the nation and the society as well as through the process of formal and informal rules complementing with each other. Under this macro background, social organizations have become the central and critical mechanism to the social dispute resolution. In the course of constructing and reforming social organizations, we should make clear where the power given to those organizations to solve disputes comes from; otherwise, valid operation mechanism will not be formed in the process of dispute resolution. In regard to how social organizations can play full of their functions, this issue cannot be considered from institutional and legal perspectives any longer We should jump out of the boundaries of institution and legislation; but rather, with the guidance of Marxist exposition in the philosophy of law about the ideal society, we should consider the values that take human freedom as the core a fundamental thought for the dispute resolution. We should draw lessons from Marxist research findings and make full use of the procedural legal paradigm. In the meanwhile, from the approach of inter subjectivity, we may find that the theoretical basis of the social mechanism for dispute resolution which takes communication power and enlightenment power as the core, will overcome the malfunction of formalist and practical legislation patterns. The theoretic hypothesis must fit in with practical demands and the social reality. Therefore, we should employ the methodology of empirical research used in sociology. We may start, from historical perspective, to do empirical study about China's traditional legal culture, find out the limitation and insufficiency of the dispute resolution system from the perspective of procedural legal paradigm, and at the same time, detect the problems of theoretic hypothesis when put into practice from the approach of social experiment. This paper addresses this problem as follows:under the guidance of the procedural legal paradigm, we should adopt communication theory from the view of its participants, freely construct social organizations rooted in the civil society and realize the institutionalization of social power through two principles:organization and regulation. As a result, we may gain social power and legalize social organizations'power to resolve disputes so that their resolutions of practical disputes may have full effectiveness; furthermore, the new mechanism of social organizations for dispute resolution can be formed. Analyzing from the roles of social organizations, the new mechanism can be divided into three types, i.e., the agency-type, mediation-type and interaction-type. The power of the first type for dispute resolution mechanism stems from communication power and it needs to construct an organization mode that can govern the internal structure and straighten out the external relations of the social organizations as well. Through formulating dispute resolution methods within the industry, coordinate and deal with various conflicts, this type of mechanism can keep the social stability. Its functions include formulating dispute resolution regulations and orders within the industry, participating in business negotiations on behalf of the industry, accepting complaints of its members, giving assistance to its members, protecting market regulations and orders in terms of equal competition, dealing with the complaints about its members from the society, helping its members deal with matters beyond their power, reflecting the suggestions and voices from its members. The second type of mechanism comes from enlightenment power. Those organizations concerning public welfare, including arbitration boards, mediation committees and dispute resolution centers, should set up organization modes in the areas of source of funds, judicial confirmation, suitable mediators and so on. On the basis of suitable mediators, rational business negotiations and the interaction with judiciary, these organizations may adopt dispute resolution methods. The power of the third type of mechanism is from public power. We should establish this kind of organization mode on the basis of such systems as core values, donors'conference as well as information disclosure, and employ dispute resolution methods based on the public interest litigations of social organizations.The realization of social organizations'micro function in dispute resolution is conducive to the reconciliation of social conflicts, the increase of the credibility of social organizations, the integration of social powers as well as the development of socialism with Chinese characteristics. The function of the mechanism of social organizations for dispute resolution is the exact entry to complete the reform of political system and social system and construction of a new type of society.