Logic Of The Court Mediation Practice

This dissertation concludes that court mediation practices may occur in a certain social space and time. All actors of the justice field agent with compromise or concession which guidance by judges, and thus make judicial reflection. The operation of the court mediation program in transition countries can see the information: the effectiveness of legitimacy through.As a mode of justice,mediation is a process of resolving disputes by judge. The vitality of mediation of court lie in that from an informal way into the formal justice system, and from the decline of prosperity to the revival. Court mediation system originated in the Border Region of Shanxi-Gansu-Ningxia during the MA trial, and it has been able to continue to exist and go on to play an important role, which system is flexibility and it is selected by actors (judges, the parties and their agents) .In modern court mediation judge is a neutral mediator. But the judge suffered in discipline that emphasize at(at least not weaken) the position of super-powers, that judges live in absolute dominant position and the other participants in the supporting role. In the disciplinary process of the judge, they access to resources by which admission qualification, adaptation, to accept the court training, promotion, and daily life particular dealing with cases. One become a judge by examination which focused on basic legal knowledge and ordinary quality in public service. To ensure the judicial process not deviate from the policy requirements, judges are also take part in political discipline. Justice must not only justify the rule of law by legal reasoning, but also fit social life, and the latter is more important in the court mediation.Litigant resorting to the courts and judges, aimed at safeguarding their rights, but in the formal justice they will not control the program, and even lead to the effect they do not want: win a case but lost interests, so they find a better way for the judicial mode, and judicial mediation result in compromise but is a better option. Lawyers help clients who paid for the case, and try their best to safeguard the interests of clients and to increase the communication space. And for them judicial mediation is undoubtedly an optional way. The judges guide and urge the litigant to mediation by which authoritative interpretation of the law, and their own judgments on the outcome of the case. As the moderator of judicial proceedings, the judge behavior in taking into account the interests of the parties and their own benefits.In the mediation process, the law is baseline by which the parties make strategies. They advance or retreat by the law or explore the reasons subject to their own specific interests. If they consider themselves wrong, the usual practice is to show weakness to the other party or the judge; If they know that reason in their side, they will take to another strategy by predict the behavior of other parties, and the worst is concession. The judges will take some strategies for a good mediation, the most important is to find out the deadline of the two sides for the benchmark. If the parties do not understand the legal provisions, the judge will strengthen the authority of interpretation of the law, and when the parties do not understand the law the judges will clarify the law.The acceptability of resulting is a important goal of judicial method particularly the court mediation, and it is not only distribution of benefits between the parties but also a subjective mental, so can be guide. From the operation point of view, even though from the outside the parties lead the startup procedure, conversion, end of court mediation process, but in essence, the judge have the potential impact. Mediation is a process that judges promote the parties cooperation to end case. Acceptable of results is the effectiveness of the judiciary and, through this effectiveness the legitimacy of the judicial system can be justified.Mediation is the co-operation process under the guidance of the judges, which construct a "semi-autonomous social field" outside the adversarial trial. The cooperation is reflective which reflect the judicial system, and the practice of rule of law in China.