ALTERNATIVE POLICING AND CRIME CONTROL IN CHINA (FROM ALTERNATIVE POLICING STYLES: CROSS-CULTURAL PERSPECTIVES, P 71-90, 1993, MARK FINDLAY AND UGLJESA ZVEKIC, EDS. -- SEE NCJ-146911)

• NCJ Number: 146915
• Author(s): S Guang-cai; C Ming-kai
• Date Published: 1993
• Length: 20 pages
• Sale Source: Kluwer Law International
• Publication Type: Program/Project Description
• Language: English
• Country: Italy

Annotation

This paper describes and assesses China's means of social control in the face of limited police personnel and resources.

Abstract

China has a large population and extensive territory. It is composed of many nationalities, and since politics, economies, and cultures differ from region to region, the circumstances and reasons for crime also differ. In July 1978, certain leaders of the central government, concerned with juvenile delinquency, proposed that the whole nation assume responsibility of the development of China's youth. Government leaders called for "comprehensive administration" as the fundamental principle for curbing crime and maintaining public order. Under "comprehensive administration," all state organizations, mass organizations, and community institutions work together through the instrument of politics, economy, ideology, culture, organization, education, morality, administration, and legal action to eliminate criminogenic conditions and promote public order. Some community instruments designed to control and suppress various types of crime are the associations for suppressing gambling; "Help and Education Groups," which help ex-offenders released from prisons and detention homes develop attitudes and values that promote law-abiding behavior; and aged persons' associations, which engage in various activities designed to prevent and control crime. Another community instrument for social control is the People's Conciliation Board, which mediates local civil disputes. These boards promote harmony and prevent the escalation of civil disputes into criminal behavior. Although this effort to involve the masses in crime prevention and the promotion of public order has been largely effective, it is also inconsistent and in need of more funding and leadership from the government. Community groups may also violate individual rights and focus more on crime control than crime prevention. More education and persuasion should be used as prevention modes.