Adversarial And Inquisitorial Systems Essay

The Adversarial System Essay

The system of criminal procedure primarily utilized in the United States is the adversarial system. The term “adversary” is easily interpreted to mean opposition. Our present criminal procedure pits two sides against each other to present their respective evidence and issues surrounding a criminal act. This paper will address the adversarial system and its expressed use in criminal court proceedings in the United States. Among the questions this paper will take into consideration are: Is the adversarial system the best way to achieve justice in the criminal courts of the United States; what those limitations are; how those limitations deliver justice; alternatives to the adversarial system; and the advantages or disadvantages of those alternatives.

Achieving JusticeWhen confronted with the issue of the best method to achieving justice in criminal court proceedings; one must understand what the adversarial system entails.

The use of a jury, the standard of evidence relied upon and the standard of proof, the cross-examining of witnesses and the ability to plead guilty, contribute greatly to reaching justice in the adversary system. They are all reasons which help the adversary system in accomplishing fairness in criminal trials. The adversary system is a feature of the common law system and was brought to Australia with England. It has adapted to the Australian legal system. It is a system of trial where, “…the two sides of the case try to present and prove their version of the facts and disprove the version of the other side.”(Cook, Creyke, & Geddes Hamer, 2005) A jury decides guilt or innocence, while a judge or magistrate guides the jury in areas of law, as well as deciding a suitable punishment for the defendant.

In criminal cases in the adversarial system of trial, justice is achieved through the use of evidence. In the adversarial system, the standard of evidence that can be used to support an argument is high. This is seen in the statement “… the rules of evidence are considerably stricter than the inquisitorial system.” (Wikipedia Encyclopedia, 2008) This shows that the evidence that will be accepted is of reasonable quality and that it will less likely be made up. The burden of proof in criminal cases lies with the prosecution. The standard that guilt must be proven is beyond reasonable doubt. This is so that there is less chance of an innocent person being convicted. The statement, “No matter how strong the prosecution’s evidence may be, if the magistrate or the jury has any reasonable doubt that he or she is guilty, the accused is entitled to be acquitted”( Nettheim, 2002) proves that there should be no doubt when convicting a person. The standard of proof and evidence that the adversary system employs are among the factors that make it the best system for achieving justice in criminal cases. Evidence...

Loading: Checking Spelling

0%

Read more

Hong Kong Magistrates trials are more inquisitorial than adversarial. Discuss

1915 words - 8 pages Hong Kong Magistrates Trials are more inquisitorial than adversarialWhen an offence has been committed there is a moral and social obligation that the perpetrator be tried and convicted. Every criminal justice system has devised a mechanism to bring about this desired effect. The hypothesis here demands an investigation of the two modes of trial that are implemented in the 'democratic' world and whether the system employed in the Hong...

Australian adversary system Essay

2172 words - 9 pages Since the English arrival in Australia they brought with them a system of criminal trial that they used in their criminal courts. This system is called the Adversarial system, it has been subject to criticism by many people in the legal field, legal commentators and ordinary citizens who are simply interested in law and its procedure in Australia.This essay will discuss that the current system in place is a second rate system when it is...

The Adversary Legal System In Australia

1217 words - 5 pages As the name suggests, the adversary system in Australia refers to a method of trial, which involves contestants or adversaries, that is, it is an adversarial approach in attempting to resolve legal issues between two opposing sides. There are five features of the adversary system in Australia; contest; party control; strict rules of...

The Impact of Formalising Plea Bargaining on Justice and Equality in the English Legal System

4139 words - 17 pages The Impact of Formalising Plea Bargaining on Justice and Equality in the English Legal System Before discussing plea bargaining it is perhaps paramount to define what is meant by the expression. Plea bargaining refers to ‘the exchange of a guilty plea for a reduced charge or some hope of a reduced sentence.’[1] In other words it is an agreement between the prosecution and the defence by which the accused changes his plea...

Undertake a critical analysis of Dispute Resolution in satisfying the objective of access to justice.

940 words - 4 pages In law, access to justice with respect to dispute resolution is a central issue. How people make use of services available to make decisions and resolve issues between them and the factors which impede or facilitate access, are all matters of concern.In dispute resolution there are various options which an individual may use in order to settle a dispute. They are as follows:1. 牋牋牋牋Courts (Civil &...

Failure of the Australian Legal System to Provide True Justice

2711 words - 11 pages Failure of the Australian Legal System to Provide True Justice The Australian legal system uses the adversary system in solving legal disputes. The adversary system is a judicial process where an independent and impartial judge administers justice in courts and two opposing parties present allegations and counter allegations regarding a legal dispute placed before the court by one or both parties. (B.Bash, 2001, Legal...

Ausralia

663 words - 3 pages The new approaches implied for some observers that ministers would continue to answer for outcomes, but that public servants would become more accountable before parliament for inputs and outputs. Several respondents declared that it is far from clear in practice where ministerial responsibility ends and administrative accountability begins. Traditional parliamentary approaches to the enforcement of ministerial responsibility focus...

Globalization in Indonesia

2329 words - 9 pages THE IMPACT OF GLOBALIZATION ON THE CONSUMER PROTECTION IN INDONESIA INTRODUCTION It is generally known that globalization has been a major discourse that has stimulated multifarious ideas, concepts and debates between the government, politicians, economists, lawyers and other related stakeholders. In terms of law and legal thought, according to Kennedy, this mode of thinking has been evolved for 150 years. He remarked three conceptual...

Examining Case for Electoral Reform

1700 words - 7 pages Examining Case for Electoral Reform The electoral system; the ways and means of electing a party or candidate to power. Elections are at the forefront of democracy being that they represent the peoples choice over indifference and dictatorship, put crudely a consensus of the majority view. But how fair are the different systems of voting, of which there are over three hundred, either actually in existence or potentially...

This essay discusses the two opposing viewpoints of death penalty with its pros and cons. It also gives some facts about people dieing from the death penalty.

575 words - 2 pages The Death Penalty, with opposing viewpointsThe first death penalty laws were first used in the eighteenth century B.C., which was the penalty for 25 different crimes. Death sentences consisted of crucifixion, drowning, beating, and being burnt alive. Hanging was the usual method in Britain in the tenth century A.D. In the sixth century, some common...

COURT REPORT

1827 words - 7 pages INDIVIDUAL COURT REPORTINTRODUCTIONMy investigations in court will explore the varying levels of communication and interaction between participants of the court. This will be split into two main topics. Firstly, I would like to examine the magistrates, their roles and interactions with various actors and reasons behind them. Secondly, I would like to examine the roles of lawyers and their...

Theoretically, there is no longer any system in this world that is purely adversarial or purely inquisitorial. These legal systems have already evolved in an effort by the countries to improve their own criminal justice system. But for purposes of academic discussion, there are several known distinctions between the two legal systems.

Need essay sample on

"Adversarial System versus Inquisitorial System" topic?

We will write a custom essay sample specifically for you

Proceed

College Students Very Often Tell EssayLab support:

I'm not in the mood to write my assignment. But I want to spend time with my boyfriend

Essay writer professionals advise:

Buy College Papers OnlineDo My Essay OnlineCheap Essay Writing 24Essay Writing Company Reviews

The Adversarial System which is the method used in the United States presumes that the truth can only be found if the litigants, the prosecution, and the defense, are in competition with each other. This system sees the court as a battlefield with either party seeking to be a victor. The prosecution aims to prove that the accused is guilty of the crime charged. They present documentary evidence and the eyewitnesses to prove that their claim is the truth. They also advance arguments and interpret laws in accordance with their interest. On the other hand, the accused does not have to prove anything at the initial stage of the trial because he has a constitutional presumption of innocence.

The Adversarial system believes that the responsibility for finding the truth should lie with the litigants, not to the judge. Thus, injury trials, the judge has a more limited role than in cases where there are no juries where the judge takes on a more active role. The role of the neutral and passive judge is only to ensure that the procedural rules are observed by excluding any irrelevant and improper evidence and ruling on objections and motions of the litigants. This system hopes that with its unique system of presenting evidence, direct examinations, cross-examinations, re-direct and re-cross-examinations, they could arrive at the truth.

On the other hand, the inquisitorial system, which was first developed by the Catholic Church during the medieval period, places the responsibility for ascertaining the truth in a legal controversy solely upon an impartial judge. The judge or the magistrate acts as the lead investigator who heads the investigation by the gathering of the facts, questioning the witness and the suspect and collecting the pieces of evidence. Unlike in the Adversarial System, the judge is not a passive recipient of information.He has a more active role as he supervises the gathering of evidence.

The role of the litigants and their representatives is very limited as their primary role is simply to assist the judge in ascertaining the truth. Although the lawyers of the litigants have an opportunity to conduct their questioning during the trial, this opportunity to conduct their direct examinations and cross examinations is very limited.

References:

  • The Inquisitorial System. (2007) Retrieved 22 September 2007

0 thoughts on “Adversarial And Inquisitorial Systems Essay

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *