BRIEF ID: 304290 Consider in what ways the ...

BRIEF ID: 304290
Consider in what ways the inquisitorial and adversarial processes differ from each other and, using relevant examples, discuss the criticisms that have been made against each system 
Definition of the inquisitorial process as given by Beale is as follows:
“…in counties where Roman law is applied, a procedure by which an examining magistrate has the duty to investigate the case and produce the evidence.”
Definition of the adversarial procedure as given by Beale is as follows:
“..a procedure in countries using common law procedures, where the parties to a case have to find the evidence themselves.”
Definitions of the two processes already indicate that these two processes are very different from each other, and that these two processes are direct opposites of each other.
The differences between the inquisitorial and adversarial processes are the following:


Inquiry into the facts


When the inquisitorial approach which is found in most European legal systems(for example ,France) the judge will investigate the facts and interview witnesses while with the adversarial approach the prosecution and defense each put their case, collect the evidence, interview the witnesses and retain their own experts .


Interrogation of witnesses


When the inquisitorial approach is followed the interrogation of the witnesses will be conducted by the judge while in the adversarial processes the prosecution and defense will have a chance to cross-examine the opposing side’s witnesses. There is no allowance in the inquisitorial system for cross-examination of witnesses entering and of guilty pleas. Therefore giving the examining magistrate potentially-oppressive powers.




Judgment


The judge in the inquisitorial process will examine the evidence and make a decision while in the adversarial process the judge acts as an impartial umpire and the jury is the decision making body.


Hearings


The inquisitorial process will normally involve a series of court-ordered submissions of material and evidence and possibly several brief hearings and examinations of witnesses and often the final hearing is just a rubber stamp to the investigating judge’s findings while in the adversarial process there is normally large all-conclusive hearing. Furthermore in the accusatorial system juries have to decide a case taking into account the evidence as presented and allowed into evidence in court on the specific day. In the inquisitorial process the judge will collect and look at all the evidence as there are no rules that limited the presentation of evidence.
The inquisitorial and adversarial processes as detailed above have had their fair share of criticisms levied against their inner workings, which will be discussed hereunder.
...