StudentShare
Contact Us
Sign In / Sign Up for FREE
Search
Go to advanced search...
Free

Adversarial and inquisitorial criminal justice - Essay Example

Cite this document
Summary
There are two systems that are utilized in the administration of criminal justice:1) the adversarial system,and 2) the inquisitorial system.This paper aims to present the difference between the two systems in relation but not limited to the purpose who are the parties involved,what are role of the parties involved, and the rules involved …
Download full paper File format: .doc, available for editing
GRAB THE BEST PAPER96.5% of users find it useful
Adversarial and inquisitorial criminal justice
Read Text Preview

Extract of sample "Adversarial and inquisitorial criminal justice"

"Accusatorial and inquisitorial systems of criminal justice have different aims. As a consequence of this they have different procedures." There aretwo systems that are utilized in the administration of criminal justice: 1) the adversarial system (also called accusatorial), and 2) the inquisitorial system. This paper aims to present the difference between the two systems in relation but not limited to the purpose, who are the parties involved, what are role of the parties involved, and the rules involved in the criminal procedure towards the attainment of their aim. Once a crime has been committed, the criminal justice is initiated by the filing of the complaint or criminal action by the victim (called the plaintiff in the complaint) to the police or to the prosecution, against the accused (called the defendant in the complaint). The different steps or procedures undertaken from the filing of the criminal complaint, trial by the court of the case, and to the conviction or non-conviction of the plaintiff is called the criminal procedure. After the complaint has been filed, the next step in the criminal procedure depends on the country of the court where the case was filed. In England and Wales and other common law countries like the United States of America for example, criminal proceedings are sometimes referred to as an adversarial system. 1 In this system, parties to a controversy (prosecution, plaintiff, defense counsel, defendant), develop and present their arguments, gather and submit evidence, call and question witnesses, and control the process within the confines of certain rules and regulations.2 On the other hand, the inquisitorial system which is employed on the continent of Europe among most (but not all) systems of civil law, the conduct of investigating the case, gathering of evidences, and questioning of witnesses is the sole responsibility of the judge of the case.3 While the judge or jury in the adversarial system is a passive recipient of information4, which means that he will only know the facts and arguments of the case during trial, the judge/s play/s much more active roles in the criminal process in the inquisitorial system that include investigating, collecting of evidences, and questioning of witnesses.5 The most striking differences between the two can be found in criminal trials. In the Anglo-American adversary system, the parties to a dispute (plaintiff and defendant), or their advocates (prosecutor and defense counsel), square off against each other and assume roles that are strictly separate and distinct from that of the decision maker that is usually a judge or a jury.6 Each party has to develop and present arguments supported by proofs. In the United States for example, the prosecutor (counsel of the state and in behalf of the plaintiff) will be the first one to present his arguments and evidences to support his arguments. His purpose is usually to prove and convince the judge that the defendant (or the accused) really committed the crime and should be penalized. After which, the defense counsel will also present his arguments and evidences to prove the innocence of his client (the defendant). After the presentation of arguments and evidences by parties, the direct examination and cross-examination follows. The prosecution and the defense counsel will have the opportunity to examine the evidences and witnesses presented by the adverse party to illicit further information and to determine the veracity and truthfulness of the evidences presented. The adversary process is governed by strict rules of evidence and procedure that allows both sides equal opportunity to argue their cases and to ensure that the decision of the judge is based solely on the evidences presented.7 If both of the parties already rested their case, meaning when direct, redirect, and cross-examinations are over, it is where the function of the judge enters. The judge should decide based from the merits of the case presented before him, whether to convict the defendant-accused or to set him free. A trial under the inquisitorial system is more likely a continuing investigation where the parties in the case must provide all relevant evidence during the proceedings.8 The trial becomes a type of screening process in which evidence is carefully examined to arrive at the truth.9 Furthermore, the judge, not the Crown (prosecution) or defense (counsel), calls and actively examines witnesses and the defendant.10 During the trial, the defendant in an inquisitorial system is the first to testify.11 He or she is allowed to see the government's case before testifying and is usually eager to give his or her side of the story.12 The judge is not a passive recipient of information; rather, the presiding judge is primarily responsible for supervising the gathering of the evidence necessary to resolve the case.13 He or she actively steers the search for evidence and questions the witnesses, including the respondent or defendant.14 Attorneys play a more passive role, suggesting routes of inquiry for the presiding judge and following the judge's questioning with a questioning of their own.15 Attorney questioning is often brief because the judge tries to ask all relevant questions.16 The defendant or accused in the adversary system has more rights than that in the inquisitorial system. In the United States, for example, the US Constitution provides for the rights of the accused during trial to include but not limited to the right to remain silent, the right to have a counsel of his own choice, and the right not to give incriminatory statements. With this, the defendant cannot be compelled to be a witness in court if he does not want. The most important of this right is that the defendant is presumed innocent until contrary is proven beyond reasonable doubt. By contrast, defendants in the inquisitorial system can be compelled to give statement but not subject to cross examination and not given under oath, and it does not protect criminal defendants as much as the adversarial system17 One of the most significant differences between the two systems occurs when a criminal defendant admits the commission of the crime.18 In an adversary system, there is no more controversy and the case proceeds to sentencing.19 By contrast in the inquisitorial system, the fact that the defendant has confessed is merely one more fact that is entered into evidence, and the confession by the defendant does not remove the requirement that the prosecution present a full case.20 Plea bargaining, in which the defendant will plead guilty to a lesser offense, or out of courts settlements, are available in adversarial system while it is not in the other system since it is considered unethical by the judge to be involved in the negotiation of sentence.21 The decision in an inquisitorial criminal trial is made by the collective vote of a number of professional judges on a small group of lay assessors (persons selected at random from the population).22 Neither the prosecution nor the defendant has an opportunity to question the lay assessors for bias.23 Generally, the judges vote after the lay assessors vote, so that they do not influence the conclusions of the lay assessors.24 A two-thirds majority is usually required to convict a criminal defendant, whereas a unanimous verdict is the norm in an adversarial system.25 Unanimous decision means that the judge/s may convict/s beyond reasonable doubt. Conclusion: Both of the systems have their own severe defenders as well as severe critics. Whatever these defenses or critics are, they will only boil down into two things, which are the separate aims of the two systems in applying different procedures. In the inquisitorial system, the intervention of the judge/s in almost all procedures of the criminal procedure is to seek for the truth in the case. He wanted to be sure and to know what really happened in the case so that he/she could give a very good judgment. While the employment of the prosecutor and defense counsel in the adversarial system is to assure the win ability of the parties who was able to engage the services of the "best" lawyer. Bibliography "Adversarial system". Global Oneness.com. Retrieved on April 1, 2009 from "Adversarial vs. Inquisitorial Model of Justice". Retrieved on April 1, 2009 from "An inquisitorial system of criminal justice offers the best system for ensuring that those guilty of committing criminal offences are convicted and that the innocent are acquitted". Law Essay.uk.com. Retrieved on April 1, 2009 from "Inquisitorial system". Answers.com. Retrieved on April 1, 2009 from "Inquisitorial system". Retrieved on April 1, 2009 from "The Adversary System: Who wins Who loses". Legal Dictionary.com Retrieved on April 1, 2009 from Read More
Cite this document
  • APA
  • MLA
  • CHICAGO
(“Adversarial and inquisitorial criminal justice Essay”, n.d.)
Retrieved from https://studentshare.org/law/1502534-adversarial-and-inquisitorial-criminal-justice
(Adversarial and Inquisitorial Criminal Justice Essay)
https://studentshare.org/law/1502534-adversarial-and-inquisitorial-criminal-justice.
“Adversarial and Inquisitorial Criminal Justice Essay”, n.d. https://studentshare.org/law/1502534-adversarial-and-inquisitorial-criminal-justice.
  • Cited: 0 times

CHECK THESE SAMPLES OF Adversarial and inquisitorial criminal justice

Australian adversarial criminal justice system

The criminal justice system in any country is one of the most difficult systems and processes to implement.... It is difficult to implement because of the nature of the crimes themselves and because of the human elements involved in the criminal justice system.... hellip; The criminal justice system in any country is one of the most difficult systems and processes to implement.... It is difficult to implement because of the nature of the crimes themselves and because of the human elements involved in the criminal justice system....
8 Pages (2000 words) Essay

Criminal justice system in Australia

Every society has its own criminal justice system.... hellip; criminal justice SYSTEM OF AUSTRALIA.... “When all is said and done, the current criminal justice system is about as fair and effective as we can reasonably expect” Every society has its own criminal justice system.... There are various types of criminal justice systems – the adversarial and the inquisitorial are two of the systems more commonly used by various countries and territories....
8 Pages (2000 words) Essay

Inquisitorial System & Adversarial System

Based on the opinion of the author of this report; Inquisitorial System, which is the better amongst the 2 (adversarial and inquisitorial), is the system to present evidence in such a manner so as it leaves the court to decide who the culprit is or to make a fair decision on the honesty amongst any 2 parties.... Inquisitorial System very generally implies to inquiries related to criminal procedures, and not inquiries related to substantive law.... erewith the judge may directly question the witnesses and the criminal against whom charges have been pressed, in order to clarify the matter to him further....
10 Pages (2500 words) Article

Adversarial system of justice

It is fair to question the ethics of the adversarial system of criminal justice because it places a higher value on winning rather than truth seeking (Kubicek 118).... The adversarial system of justice is where two advocates represent their clients before a group of people or a person usually a judge or jury.... … With this system, justice gets served when the most effective adversary gets to convince the jury or the judge that his or her point of view on the case is the correct one....
2 Pages (500 words) Essay

How Adversarial Approach Affects the Depth and Scope of Inquiry

hellip; The author states that following this murder, the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) initiated an investigation in the matter with the aim of granting justice to the parents of the victim and to bring to book the perpetrators of the offense.... On this ground, it is reasonable to take a new approach in the case to ensure that justice is granted to the victims.... This inquiry followed an inquisitorial approach, in which the police, jury and other stakeholders were expected to actively participate in the investigation process....
7 Pages (1750 words) Case Study

Analysis of Adversarial and Inquisitorial in Canada

hellip; Today, the system of justice in Canada bases on the adversarial model.... The inquisitorial system of justice is the commonest procedure of approach in many civil jurisdictions.... The two advances are either inquisitorial or adversarial.... Canada should take steps in introducing elements of inquisitorial system into the current system of application.... As opposed to being a referee and an arbiter like in the adversarial system, the judge in the inquisitorial system takes the roles of both the prosecutor and judge....
8 Pages (2000 words) Essay

The Disadvantages and Flaws of the Adversarial System of Justice

The paper "The Disadvantages and Flaws of the Adversarial System of justice " highlights that the adversarial system of law confronts general criticism with regard to level and quality of justice in any jurisdictional setup, the ability to be fair, and the tendency to protect rights of them, civilians.... The justice court makes the decision on the basis of performance of both the adversaries as the trial continues.... Furthermore, counseling is a detrimental factor in the decision-making of any case present in the court of justice....
8 Pages (2000 words) Coursework

Criminal Justice System of Australia

Such justice system seeks to manage the peace and order in any society, ensuring that all its citizens are protected from harmful elements and that the appropriate due processes are available for parties in the redress of… There are various types of criminal justice systems – the adversarial and the inquisitorial are two of the systems more commonly used by various countries and territories.... It shall discuss the This paper is to be analysed based on the Australian justice system as it applies its adversarial system as a fair and equitable tool....
10 Pages (2500 words) Essay
sponsored ads
We use cookies to create the best experience for you. Keep on browsing if you are OK with that, or find out how to manage cookies.
Contact Us