The Reformation Of The Chinese Judicial Field

In early2012, I had the opportunity to attend a research of Chinese grassroots judicial reform in O city of S province-the reform of the service center of litigation carried out by the court, which raised the author’s original question about this reform. Around the litigation service center, the author uses bourdieu’s field theory as the analysis framework of this paper, describing the expression and practice of the sample court, reflecting the meaning of the litigation service center. The court’s ultimate purpose is to achieve the separation of trial and mediation by means of connecting both lawsuit and mediation.This paper also gives a detailed argumentation and meaning of this inquiry. As to the differences between the practice and the expression (referring to the official documents and speeches) of the courts,the author gives her own opinion. This article is not limited to the temporal perspective, and studys the eroding from the political field to the judicial field and the predicament intrinsic of judicial field in a historical perspective. By broadening our horizon, we analyze the changes in the judicial field, including both the inside and outside factors, to get the intrinsic quality from the phenomenon and to predict the trajectory of justice.This article includes five parts. The introduction section triggers a series of problems from the concrete practice of the court. By studying the information of related research, we find the inherent paradigm of the existing information and possible omissions. We also give an illustration of the address, methods and the detailed information of the sample place.The first chapter is an introduction of the analysis tool. It gives an detailed illustration of bourdieu’s field theory, making specific explanations about the "field" and "habitus","capital" and other key words and analyzing their internal relations.The second chapter focuses on the characteristics of the judicial field under the policy of mediation priorities. We prove that the court faces a dilemma situation from the encroachment of external political filed and the weakening of judicial filed. On one hand, the changes of the field make the capital of the actors obviously deficientor make them unable to work, so that people will question the court.On the other hand, the ambiguity of the boundary of field makes the court difficult to positioning itself.The third chapter includes two sections--.The first section is the expression of the court. Utilizing the official statements of court model building the expression of the needed request and target reflecting objective, we analyze the inner meaning that the courts want to express. Combining the new meaning of the existence of concrete meaures, we get the innovation of the concepts and the possibility that the courts try to escape from the constrain of existing concept from the basic principle, the original purpose and the meaning of the terms themself. The second section focuses on the practice of the court, including three parts:hardware facilities, staffing, the strategy of the actors. From the point of hardware construction, the judicial operation is completely according to the policy’s literal requirements that justice is for the people. Basic guarantee on staffing meet the requirements of the litigation service center, too. But the analysis of the strategy of judge and party shows that the expression does not consistent with the practice. In the fifth part utilizing the potential future strategy selection of the parties, the changes of policy, the academic promotion, the positioning of court itself and the arrangement of the strategies under existing management system, we try to track on the development of judicial field.