Special Offer!Pay less for your papers
Get 15% off your first order
|← Social Democracy||The Economys Effect on Presidential Elections →|
The role of the Communist Party in the political and legal systems
The role of the Communist Party in the political and legal systems is that of leading in all aspects of governance in the Chinese society as it is the only political party. A political system has been created by the communist party, that effectively intertwines with the governing system. The theoretical assumption is that the state and the communist party are two separate entities. This is not the case; as the fact that the two are so much intertwined, it means that the communist party essentially runs the People’s Republic of China (Paris, 2007).
There are many groups within the party, and they are called organs. The National Party congress constitutes one of its main organs. The others are the Political Bureau and its leaders, the political Bureau Standing Committee, the Military Commission, the Secretariat, as well as the Discipline Inspection Commission. All of these having decision making power, the groups are in charge of the various aspects of coordinating the implementation of the changes that are made in collaboration with many other state commissions spread across the vast country. The communist party has the rights of selecting the key leadership positions which are held in these bureaus. The staffs that work in the lower administrations are appointed by their immediate leaders as the communist party mandates them to do so (Paris, 2007).
The Communist party’s Authority of the state is actually subjected by the Chinese Constitution. However, since all the key state positions go to party members, the party is in full control of the state governments. Leaders of state commissions double as the leaders of the corresponding party commission. In the case where we have a head of state in educational administration, he is also found to be the CPC’s head of education commission. Therefore it all works as a parallel as the decisions within the part are made and then carried out on the state by the same officials. The authority to amend the constitution also rests with them, and they can do so to fit with their plans for the society. Over every five year period, the National Party Congress approves the changes that have been made by the Political Bureau (Biao, 2008).
Standing at ten million members strong, the members of the Communist party also act as government officials. This makes the Communist party the one with absolute power over the people’s republic of China, since its members permeate the state administrations. Government control is assured at all levels in this kind of setting and hence all the citizens of China are subject to directives from the Communist party (Biao, 2008).
Fragmented authoritarianism refers to a system where the power ends up shared or divided among different groups. As indicated above, China’s communist party operates in this manner of set up. It touches on three important areas. These include structural distribution of resources and authority, value integration, and the process of decision-making and policy implementation. The communist party of China embodies this three. In terms of values, the fragmented authoritarianism ensures that there is a strong basis for integration of policymaking. Mao’s political administration has seen to it that leaders used massive doses of ideological indoctrination as a means of achieving greater fidelity to the goals of leaders. This is even in the absence of informational and other resources that in adequate presence assure the desired level of citizenry compliance.
Channels of resolving disputes among ordinary Chinese
The Chinese society is not one where one who seeks redress from the government meets with open arms. It is therefore not surprising that the fact that when the Chinese premier, Wen Jiabao, listened to complaints from workers whose wages had gone unpaid, citizens whose lands had been grabbed, and those whose property had been demolished, the meeting was termed as very unusual. In many countries, the leaders will jump at the problem before the citizens walk into the nearest court and have the judge order the authorities make every necessary amend. Jiabao went out to them to get the facts, and he told them that they should not hold back but they should provide the facts just as they are. This is one way of meeting the social problems that face a people; talking to their leaders at different forums.
Citizens with grievances about local officials take them to higher authorities and ultimately the central government in the case of china is petitioning system. Every year, millions seek redress but due to the inefficiency of the system, few actually ever get satisfaction. The local authorities block many complaints, but they end up penalized when the residents from their area decide to complain to higher officials. Beijing fames itself for detaining those whose cases reach it.
The second channel open to citizens is that given through voting. However, the Chinese citizens rarely get a chance to seek revenge by vote. It is only since the 1990s that the ordinary Chinese citizens have had the power, to elect their own heads. The communist party secretaries at the end of the day are the one that hold the real power. A classic example of this is the March 9th Zhaiqiao elections. If anything political is going on at the capital, the all other political endeavors are considered as happening at a sensitive time. In this instance, the ten day annual session of China’s rubber-stamp parliament, the National People’s congress, was in the meantime underway in Beijing. The mere fact that the NPC is in session warrants that the local officials are given strict orders to avoid any disturbance that might distract attention from the meetings in the capital. With this kind of approach, the ordinary citizens have a raw deal when it comes to voicing their complaints.
A question of society without litigation; is china one?
The recent past has seen some changes in the Chinese society as the country is increasingly becoming modernized. The main reason why a modern judicial system is unlikely to take firm hold is that most ordinary Chinese still cling to the old ideas of litigation. According to Fei Xiaotong, a sharp contrast exists between the locals and the city dwellers when it comes to the issue of litigation. It is shocking that while in the rural China, a litigation monger, referred to as Songshi, is considered no less than someone who creates discord and is a trouble maker, the cities have lawyers who promote litigation and have a ‘honorable’ placed behind their names. These lawyers have a considerable say on what goes on as what they say is so important it makes news at times. The impression that the traditionally minded people have of city people is that they are all full of disputes and these places are where well-behaved people should not live (Huang, 2007).
The question of whether China is still a society without litigation can best be answered dependent what part of china a person comes from. Those from the city are likely to say no; for enlightenment to the facts of law is quite common. These ones can walk up to someone who knows the law and ask what they do not understand. However, the people from rural china may feel less confident. To them order is achieved through rituals, and anyone who and anyone who does otherwise will be accused of being atrociously behaved. A case only ends up in front of an official when one has certainly broken the traditional norms.
The question of a changing china is a difficult one to answer. These long held tradions will demand the direct involvement of the people if ever china is to emerge from its current system of control by a single party and particular individuals.