Table of Contents

Legal Innovations in Asia

Legal Innovations in Asia

Judicial Lawmaking and the Influence of Comparative Law

Studies in Comparative Law and Legal Culture series

Edited by John O. Haley and Toshiko Takenaka

Legal Innovations in Asia explores how law in Asia has developed over time as a result of judicial interpretation and innovations drawn from the legal systems of foreign countries. Expert scholars from around the world offer a history of law in the region while also providing a wider context for present-day Asian law. The contributors share insightful perspectives on comparative law, the role of courts, legal transplants, intellectual property, Islamic law and other issues as they relate to the practice and study of law in Japan, China, Taiwan, Korea and Southeast Asia.

Chapter 3.3: Civil procedure and anti-modern myths in the “Harmonious Society”: China and pre-war Japan compared

Dongsheng Zang

Subjects: law - academic, asian law, comparative law


In some areas of law, such as patent, the judiciary in China plays important roles in filling in the gaps in statutory language, thus making necessary policy decisions just like its counterparts in Japan, Korea, and Taiwan. In many other areas of social life in China today, however, the judiciary’s function is strikingly different. For example, in environmental pollution disputes, labor disputes, village governance, land taking and property disputes, etc., there emerges a movement to push for mediation under the slogan of “harmonious society.” The real function of the mediation campaigns in China today, however, is to deprive citizens of their legal rights in formal law. “Harmony,” often justified as a cultural preference, is in reality often forced upon citizens from above. In other words, cultural assertion of “harmony” is a discursive technique deployed by the ruling elites to suppress resistance and safeguard the status quo. In the United States, early studies of China’s mediation were conducted in the 1960s through interviews with refugees fleeing Mao’s China, so no one was under any illusion in regard to China’s mediation. Nor are contemporary observers impressed by the campaigns in the name of “harmonious society” in China today. Indeed, Professor Vai Io Lo’s chapter in this edited volume is a good example of this growing body of literature that provides insightful critiques of mediation. Curiously, despite some limited efforts to introduce a comparative perspective, current literature tends to treat mediation campaigns as a Chinese phenomenon, thus isolating it from similar experiences in other societies.

You are not authenticated to view the full text of this chapter or article.

Elgaronline requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books or journals. Please login through your library system or with your personal username and password on the homepage.

Non-subscribers can freely search the site, view abstracts/ extracts and download selected front matter and introductory chapters for personal use.

Your library may not have purchased all subject areas. If you are authenticated and think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.

Further information