The Study Of Chinese Judicial Policy Shortsightcd-ness

"More law cases but fewer people" has become the main difficulties faced by Chinese court system, especially the courts at the grassroots level. After the implement of accreditation by registration system and charging no fee in the labor dispute lawsuit as the new administrative procedure law orders .The problem became even more serious, as a bottleneck of the judicial credibility incensement .In order to solve the problem of "More law cases but fewer people," series of measures were adopted by the Supreme Court with the core of dispersing cases have effect to some extent, but they still remain palliative.This paper argues that the root of the problem is the short-sight act of judicial policy. The primary function of court is the solution to the dispute, which release the right incentives for the society and the market by resolving disputes. If the law only focuses on the former and ignores the latter, it will lose the quality of the enterprise and even become a ”dead knot”,marked by the abuse mediation and the enforcement of reconciliation. The essence of the compromising justice is to improve the efficiency of dispute resolution through oppression creditors. However, the consequences is the encouragement of rent-seeking litigation, the debtor will not be active to pay back their debts, but waiting for being suited.This long-term judicial policy perform of encouraging mediation led to a booming number of cases and judicial dilemma .Once the legal bottom line once is being conquered, cliff is the only result. Therefore, it is necessary to deal with the short-sighted judicial policy. Only through the Limitation of the scope of mediation, prohibiting reconciliation execution,and so on, or the justice could never turn to be aggressive from being too compromising, nor improving judicial efficiency and judicial credibility in the long term scale.The first chapter of this paper describes the problem of "fewer judges but more cases". A large number of empirical survey data, such as the justice-number of grass-roots courts, the cases accepted for the trial, cases-accepted for the judge per capital etc. Then, the current situation of fewer judges but more cases"is to be analyzed .The idea of the strategy of dealing with the court system is to increase the registered-judges number, which is the core of the solution, fails. So the analysis of the academic world about the situation is to be shown in Chapter one section three,which does not cover the most important element which is described in the fourth section, I gives the brief introduction of the shot-sighted action of judicial policy and discusses its relationship with the "More law cases but fewer judges" situation.Chapter II gives the brief reasons about the shot-sighted action of judicial policy which covers the states the causes of judicial policy short-termism and reveals the weak Chinese court execution, litigation costs reduction has violated the legal rule.There also exists the problem of lack of trust and a serious shortage of social capital.The third chapter focuses on the short-termism consequences of judicial policy. This article describes how the litigants and the courts have their own strategic choices facing of the specific judicial policies of China. Chapter III develops economics model of the parties, pointed out that the parties will have their own choices facing a judicial policy under the guidance of gaming strategy choice after complex analysis.This will lead to a large number of rent-seeking class litigation and intensify the serious situation of more cases even fewer judges. Chapter IV begins by exploring the existence of the short-termism of judicial policy, reversing the function of the court to release the right incentives for the society and the market by solving the dispute. Then judge-max model is to be set in order to evaluate whether this would make the judge pay too much attention on mediation, reconciliation which will exacerbate the judicial predicament.Chapter V is the countermeasure of judicial policy. It points out the strength of enforcement and the arm to the teeth. Strict judicial balance between mediation and judicial sentencing also the limitation of mediation and abolishing the execution of reconciliation is also to be mentioned. If possible, adjusting the litigation fees,maintaining the of multi-dispute resolving means to screen the court case and at the same time , ensure that the common people could have other ways to solve disputes.Finally the establishment of a social credit system is to be advocated as an external security which allowing citizens to treasure their own credibility, dare not violate the credit behavior. Otherwise severe punishment would follow to safeguard social virtuous cycle of credit.