Education, Science, Technology, Innovation and Life
Open Access
Sign In

Research on the Compulsory Conciliation System

Download as PDF

DOI: 10.23977/law.2023.020101 | Downloads: 11 | Views: 459


Cuicui Chen 1, Yaxin Geng 1, Jialong Nie 2


1 Zhanjiang University of Science and Technology, Zhanjiang, China
2 Jiangxi University of Technology, Nanchang, China

Corresponding Author

Yaxin Geng


The Chinese conciliation system, known as the 'Eastern Experience', was born in primitive society, written down in the Western Zhou Dynasty, incorporated into the law formally during the Yuan Dynasty, and became more systematic in the Ming and Qing Dynasties. The traditional Chinese conciliation system has profoundly influenced the modern Chinese conciliation system, which has a long history of development in China. International interactions rise international disputes which give birth to international conciliation, and modern international conciliation formally emerged and developed in the 1920s. Since international conciliation in this period was mainly based on international investigation and conciliation, it embodies the characteristics of investigation and conciliation. Compulsory conciliation, as a breakthrough and development in international conciliation, is procedurally mandatory but the consequences are not binding. With the successful compulsory conciliation case between Timor-Leste and Australia, the international community has given more attention to compulsory conciliation. Compulsory conciliation, which blends the compulsion of arbitration and litigation procedures and the flexibility of traditional conciliation procedures, also has certain drawbacks. The local delay in development owing to COVID-19 does not prevent the occurrence of investment disputes. This article intends to conduct a preliminary research on the compulsory conciliation system in order to prepare the basis for the application of compulsory conciliation to investment disputes, as well as to the Belt and Road investment disputes.


Conciliation, international conciliation, compulsory conciliation, dilemma


Cuicui Chen, Yaxin Geng, Jialong Nie, Research on the Compulsory Conciliation System. Science of Law Journal (2023) Vol. 2: 1-6. DOI: 10.23977/law.2023.020101.


[1] Zeng Xianyi. (2009). Study on some Issues of Traditional Chinese Conciliation System. China Legal Science, (04), 34–46.
[2] Li Chao & Li Yilin. (2013). Chinese Conciliation System in the Perspective of Traditional Culture: Historical Origins, Modern Transformation and Development Path. Legal and Economy (late edition) (03), 33–35.
[3] Ji Weidong, Yi Ping. (1999). The Decree Development Mechanism of the Conciliation System: From the Contradictory Context of Legalization in China. Comparative Law Studies (Z1), 369-377.
[4] Wu Zongxian. (2002). Comment on Restorative Judice. Journal of Jiangsu Public Security College (03), 69-85.
[5] Dong Limin. (2020). Conciliation and Its Practice under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (Doctoral dissertation, Xiamen University).
[6] Louise E. Matthaei. (1908). The Place of Arbitration and Mediation in Ancient Systems of International Ethics. The Classical Quarterly, 2(4):254-260.
[7] Kaja Harter-Uibopuu. (2002). Ancient Greek Approaches toward Alternative Dispute Resolution. Willamette Journal of International Law and Dispute Resolution, 10(1):62-69.
[8] Hong Quanshou & Liu Yi. (2020-02-21). New developments in the Greek Conciliation System. People's Court Daily, 008.
[9] Lavalle, Roberto. (1996). Conciliation under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea: A Critical Overview. Austrian Review of International & European Law, 2(1), 25-48.

All published work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Copyright © 2016 - 2031 Clausius Scientific Press Inc. All Rights Reserved.