【作者】 段星宇；

【导师】 翁有为；

【作者基本信息】 河南大学 ， 法律史， 2011， 硕士

【摘要】 调解是中国社会一种古老的纠纷解决方式,在中国已经运作了数千年,并在实践中得到不断的完善和发展。它承载着中国传统文化和社会功能的历史重负,成为我国法律文化中极具中国特色的部分。中华民国政府的成立,标志着近代中国的民族国家建构过程进入了一个新的阶段。尽管这一时期战乱频仍,但是民国政府从未放弃法律现代化的努力。相比中国古代传统的民事调解模式,民国时期的民事调解制度发生了深刻变革。可以说,民国时期的民事调解制度,是中国法律现代化的一部分,是将中国传统的非制度化的调处制度化、成文化的尝试,也是借鉴西方民事调解制度,形成自己制度设计的结果。本文目的在于通过描述这一新的调解制度与中国传统调解制度存在的诸多不同,以说明中国近代社会转型过程中新型的民事调解制度作为一种全新的制度模式所具有的开创性意义。第一部分,详细介绍国民政府时期官方司法调解的运作机制,重点讨论调解依据、调解主体、民事调解的适用范围、民事调解的程序、调解效力的变化,同时对官方调解与诉讼模式进行比较,以具体案例说明清末民初与民国时期调解所展现的不同风格的官方司法技艺、国家治理策略、官方调解的态度、依据及效果的演进。第二部分,指出民间调解主体的变化、调解的范围的调整与扩大、民间权威在民事纠纷调解中的作用及变化、民间调解的依据变化。意在说明民国时期的民间调解将更多新型国家意识形态纳入调解的依据,在调解的过程中不仅要实现当事人或者基层社会的某些具体目的,更重要的是要着眼于更大的目标即从整个国家政权所追求的目的出发来认识调解制度本身。第三部分,半正式行政调解-从简约化治理到引入现代治理模式、调解者的选任资格变化、调解组织的组织原则与活动原则、调解范围、基层组织中准官员主持调解的社会、政治背景变化、以具体案例分析半正式行政调解体现国家与社会的互动。第四部分,对国民政府时期事纠纷调解进行评价,指出影响民事调解案件成败的主要因素包括调解主持者的个人威望与地位、民事纠纷的具体情况、当事人双方的个人因素;同时,对民国时期民事调解制度的局限性进行分析,指出程序性不足导致民事调解存在一定的任意性,民间调解中对民间调解主持者权威的依赖,使得民间调解存在先天的缺陷以及调解中对“无讼”理念的强调和强制性倾向一定程度上影响了调解的效果。更多还原

【Abstract】 Mediation is one of the modes with deep Chinese characteristics of resolving disputes, and it bears significant importance in resolving court cases, improving social harmony and maintaining rule of government. The non-stopping development and improvement makes it one unique part of our country’s culture of law. We put focus on investigating the progress of the transition of mediation mechanism in modern history, in order to discover the background and rules of this transition, at the same time, we try to use it as a reference for improving the function and value of mediation mechanism in our era of social transformation.In the first part, we will detail the operating mechanism of official mediation during the era of Republic of China, and we would focus on the changes of the basis, main parties, the scope, the procedure and effects of official mediation. We would compare official mediation and legal suit in particular cases. We would illustrate different kinds of official legal craft and national management strategy, official attitude towards mediation, the evolution of basis and outcome in traditonal China and late Qing dynasty and early Republic of China.In the second part, we would point out changes of main parties of folk mediation, adjustment and expand of the scope of mediation, the role and changes of folk authorities in mediation, and changes of the basis of mediation. We try to illustrate that more and more national ideologies were put into the basis of mediation, and the goal of mediation were not any more limited at solving specific problems of the individuals and basic-level society, more importantly, the mediation system became a link of the big picture——the pursuit of good operation of the whole nation.In the third part, we will detail the operating mechanism of mediation during the period of Republic of China, and divide civil mediation to three types: folk mediation, official mediation and semiofficial mediation. We would point out changes of main parties of folk mediation, adjustment and expand of the scope of mediation, the role and changes of folk authorities in mediation. The basis of folk mediation changed from Confucius thoughts and order which were expressed as senses and rites to modern legal concept. We would also point out the changes of main parties of official mediation, transition from tradition“official approval and folk mediation”to“en forced mediation”and“mediation at will”. We would compare official mediation and legal suit in particular cases. We would illustrate different kinds of official legal craft and national management strategy, official attitude towards mediation, the evolution of basis and outcome in feudal China and late Qing dynasty and early Republic of China. We would introduce semiofficial mediation in the sense of the transition from condiment management to modern management mode, vary of qualifications, changes of social and political background presided byIn the forth part, we would evaluate the mediation mechanism of civil disputes, and point out the main reasons whether the mediation could work out was the prestige and social status of the person presiding, the particular situation in every case and personal factors of the persons involved. On the other hand, we would analyze the limitations of mediation mechanism in the late Qing dynasty and early Republic of China, then point out shortcomings of the procedure lead to randomness in civil mediations. And reliance on the prestige of person presiding makes the shortcomings and emphasize on“no suit”concept as well as the enforcement tendency affected outcomes of mediations.更多还原