Comparative Legal Systems

Pages 12 (3012 words)
Download 0
All systems of justice are adversarial in nature. To what extent they are fair or just simply depend on the players, the judges and the set up of legal principles applied. There are opposing sides to any judicial proceeding which requires an overseer to maintain fair play in the process.


In some cases the opponents in a case are allowed the opportunity to present their case to a jury. In other instances the opposing parties must rely on a judge only to decide the truthfulness of each side.
To understand the adversarial system of justice, one must notice the distinctions between the types of judicial systems in practice today. "Let us start with the classical distinction between adversarial and inquisitorial systems of criminal justice. The usual way of describing the former is as a contest between two equal parties, seeking to resolve a dispute before a passive and impartial judge, with a jury ('the people') pronouncing one version of events to be the truth." (Fennell, Harding, Jorg & Swart, 1995). Where there are two parties interested in the truthfulness of an issue, fairness may be compromised when the interests of either party are at stake. The adversarial process incorporates just that. "But this places inordinate faith in the notion that partisan manipulation of evidentiary materials, even under equality of arms, can put an independent judge in a position to determine truth--an assumption at best unproven, and at worst highly implausible. ...
Download paper
Not exactly what you need?