The document discusses key aspects of the inquisitorial and adversarial legal systems.
The inquisitorial system is used in countries like France where the judge takes an active role in investigating facts, questioning witnesses, and compiling evidence. In contrast, the adversarial system used in countries like Australia employs a passive judge who oversees a contest between opposing parties.
Some key differences are that the inquisitorial system does not presume innocence, allows a wider range of evidence, and uses a panel of judges and lay assessors for criminal decisions. The adversarial system places the burden of proof on the prosecution and relies on cross-examination of witnesses in court.
The document provides an overview of the inquisitorial and adversarial legal systems. It describes key features of the inquisitorial system including the judge taking an active role in investigating facts, the origins in ecclesiastical courts, and the judge instructeur gathering evidence. It also outlines characteristics of adversarial systems such as common law countries using passive judges, parties presenting evidence, and the presumption of innocence.
The document discusses the importance and functions of the judiciary. It notes that the judiciary is the third organ of government responsible for applying laws to specific cases and settling disputes. Its key functions include giving justice, interpreting and applying laws, playing a role in law-making through precedents, protecting rights, and acting as guardian of the constitution. An independent judiciary is important as it protects citizens from legislative and executive overreach and ensures the rule of law. The document also examines different methods of appointing judges to ensure judicial independence and impartiality.
The document discusses key concepts of the English legal system including separation of powers, parliamentary sovereignty, and the uncodified UK constitution. It explains that the UK has an unwritten constitution drawn from statutes, common law, and other sources. The judiciary is responsible for interpreting and applying the law, though judicial review is weaker than other systems due to the lack of a codified constitution. Judges are appointed by the government but have security of tenure and are expected to remain politically neutral. The hierarchy of courts and judges in England and Wales is also outlined.
The document discusses three main methods for selecting judges: appointment, examination, and election. Appointment is most common for lower courts in common law countries and supreme/constitutional courts in civil law countries. Examination systems are prevalent in civil law nations, where judges undergo training and pass an exam to join the civil service. A small number of countries directly elect some or all judges, such as Bolivia where most judges are elected by popular vote.
This document summarizes key aspects of the Australian legal system. It outlines the classification of law into public law and private law. Public law includes criminal law, administrative law, and constitutional law. Private law regulates relationships between individuals and organizations, including contract law, tort law, and property law. The document also discusses criminal and civil court procedures, the roles of legal professionals, juries, and compares common law and civil law systems.
The document discusses the key principles and outcomes of democracy. It notes that democracy promotes equality, dignity, better decision-making, and conflict resolution. While democracy can be slow and inefficient, it provides legitimacy and empowerment as it is a government chosen by the people. The outcomes of democracy include political equality, accommodation of social diversity, allowing the majority to work with the minority, and protecting individual freedom and dignity, including women's rights. Democracy also takes steps to reduce the effects of castes through policies like reservation. Overall, democracy is formed on the principle of rule by the people and provides an accountable, transparent and responsive form of government.
The document provides an overview of the inquisitorial and adversarial legal systems. It describes key features of the inquisitorial system including the judge taking an active role in investigating facts, the origins in ecclesiastical courts, and the judge instructeur gathering evidence. It also outlines characteristics of adversarial systems such as common law countries using passive judges, parties presenting evidence, and the presumption of innocence.
The document discusses the importance and functions of the judiciary. It notes that the judiciary is the third organ of government responsible for applying laws to specific cases and settling disputes. Its key functions include giving justice, interpreting and applying laws, playing a role in law-making through precedents, protecting rights, and acting as guardian of the constitution. An independent judiciary is important as it protects citizens from legislative and executive overreach and ensures the rule of law. The document also examines different methods of appointing judges to ensure judicial independence and impartiality.
The document discusses key concepts of the English legal system including separation of powers, parliamentary sovereignty, and the uncodified UK constitution. It explains that the UK has an unwritten constitution drawn from statutes, common law, and other sources. The judiciary is responsible for interpreting and applying the law, though judicial review is weaker than other systems due to the lack of a codified constitution. Judges are appointed by the government but have security of tenure and are expected to remain politically neutral. The hierarchy of courts and judges in England and Wales is also outlined.
The document discusses three main methods for selecting judges: appointment, examination, and election. Appointment is most common for lower courts in common law countries and supreme/constitutional courts in civil law countries. Examination systems are prevalent in civil law nations, where judges undergo training and pass an exam to join the civil service. A small number of countries directly elect some or all judges, such as Bolivia where most judges are elected by popular vote.
This document summarizes key aspects of the Australian legal system. It outlines the classification of law into public law and private law. Public law includes criminal law, administrative law, and constitutional law. Private law regulates relationships between individuals and organizations, including contract law, tort law, and property law. The document also discusses criminal and civil court procedures, the roles of legal professionals, juries, and compares common law and civil law systems.
The document discusses the key principles and outcomes of democracy. It notes that democracy promotes equality, dignity, better decision-making, and conflict resolution. While democracy can be slow and inefficient, it provides legitimacy and empowerment as it is a government chosen by the people. The outcomes of democracy include political equality, accommodation of social diversity, allowing the majority to work with the minority, and protecting individual freedom and dignity, including women's rights. Democracy also takes steps to reduce the effects of castes through policies like reservation. Overall, democracy is formed on the principle of rule by the people and provides an accountable, transparent and responsive form of government.
The adversarial system refers to the court acting as an impartial judge between two opposing parties - the prosecution/plaintiff and the defense/defendant. Key features include the parties having control over investigating and presenting their case, the judge ensuring fair compliance with rules of evidence and procedure, the burden being on the prosecution to prove their case, and standards of proof differing between civil and criminal cases. Legal representation is also needed for parties to effectively operate within the adversarial system.
Analysis on The Presentation of Evidence Between the Adversary System in Mala... Selvakumar Balakrishnan
INTRODUCTION
THE ADVERSARIAL SYSTEM IN MALAYSIA
THE INQUISITORIAL SYSTEM IN GENERAL
PRESENTATION OF EVIDENCE IN ADVERSARY SYSTEM IN MALAYSIA
PRESENTATION OF EVIDENCE IN INQUISITORIAL SYSTEM IN GENERAL
THE ADVANTAGES AND DISADVANTAGES OF ADVERSARY SYSTEM
THE ADVANTAGES AND DISADVANTAGES OF INQUISITORIAL SYSTEM
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
The 5 Pillars of Criminal Justice System.pptxNhardzBriones1
The document discusses the 5 pillars of the criminal justice system in the Philippines: law enforcement, prosecution, courts, corrections, and community. It describes the roles and functions of each pillar.
The law enforcement pillar is responsible for crime prevention, enforcement of laws, and gathering evidence for prosecution. The prosecution pillar investigates criminal complaints and prosecutes alleged offenders. The courts pillar adjudicates cases and renders judgments. The corrections pillar oversees prisons, jails, probation, and parole. The community pillar both assists in crime prevention/solving and holds other pillars accountable.
For the criminal justice system to be effective, strong coordination between the pillars is needed, as each depends on the proper functioning of the others due to the
The document lists the members of a group and discusses democracy and elections. It defines democracy as a form of government where citizens have equal say in decisions. It outlines principles of democracy like rule of law, citizen participation, and free and fair elections. The benefits of democracy discussed are protection from oppression and laws that ensure citizen safety. Elections allow citizens to choose representatives and influence policies through voting. Key aspects covered are voting rights, voter registration, and primary vs general elections.
The document discusses issues with the Indian judiciary system including a large backlog of cases, lack of judges, and corruption. It notes that while India has a functioning independent judiciary, efficiency is lacking. Case studies are presented on labor laws that allowed one worker to keep his job for 22 years despite repeated infractions, and the slow trial and lenient sentencing for the juvenile in the high-profile 2012 Delhi gang rape case. Bottlenecks in the system like matrimonial cases and ways to remove them like special fast-track courts are proposed. In summary, the document examines inefficiencies in the Indian judicial system through its large backlog, lack of judges, and case studies, and proposes methods to remove bottlenecks
The document discusses the Right to Information (RTI) Act in India. It notes that the legislative intent of the Act was to promote transparency, accountability, and good governance by giving citizens access to information held by public authorities. However, it argues that more needs to be done to ensure public authorities properly implement the Act through compliance monitoring and redefining ambiguous definitions. The document concludes by thanking the reader and emphasizing that the overall objective of the RTI Act is to enhance good governance in India.
Many people are unfamiliar with the American Criminal Justice System, so this presentation condenses primary and necessary concepts for easy comprehension so that all can understand how the system functions and why!
Disclaimer: this presentation was completed for an in-class assignment at Rockhurst University. The "for Dummies" branding is not my own and was simply used as a format for the assignment concept.
This document provides an overview of comparative law and different legal traditions around the world. It discusses the importance of understanding legal systems other than one's own and describes some key features of the major legal traditions: common law, civil law, socialist law, and Islamic law. For each tradition, it examines historical origins, basic structural features like use of written codes versus precedent, adversarial versus inquisitorial procedures, and role of judicial review. Specific examples are given of legal systems from different countries and cultures to illustrate variations within the overarching traditions.
This document discusses several topics related to law and the legal profession. It begins by outlining different theories of law, such as natural law and positive law. It then discusses legal justifications like the harm principle and legal paternalism. The document also examines perceptions of the judicial system and whether it achieves true justice. It analyzes the roles and ethics of legal professionals like attorneys and judges. Specifically, it debates whether attorneys should serve as legal agents or moral agents. Finally, the document reviews ethical standards and codes of conduct for legal professionals.
This document discusses government structures and institutions. It defines structures as the basic components that allow governments to function, such as legislatures, courts, and bureaucracies. Institutions are more specific organizational structures through which political power is exercised, like the British House of Commons or U.S. Supreme Court. The document also examines how a society's view of human nature is reflected in its political institutions, using the U.S. system as an example that was designed based on a distrustful view of human nature. Finally, it discusses factors involved in choosing government institutions, such as a nation's political culture, basic form of government, and centralization of power.
The document defines key concepts in Indian law such as the roles of courts, judges, and the distinction between civil and criminal justice systems. It also explains important legal terminology and outlines the Indian Penal Code and Code of Criminal Procedure which establish criminal offenses and procedures. The Criminal Procedure Code and Evidence Act have been updated to the Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita, and Bharatiya Sakshya Sanhita respectively.
Strengths and Weakness of the Western Australian Adversarial (1).pptxAndrewBell441612
The document discusses the key aspects of the adversarial court system used in countries like Australia, the UK, Canada, and the US. It outlines that the adversarial system relies on the parties to present evidence and argue their respective positions to the judge or jury, who remain impartial. It also describes the different roles of parties, judges, rules of evidence, and burdens of proof in civil versus criminal cases. The document analyzes both the strengths of the adversarial system in promoting transparency and procedural fairness, and its weaknesses, such as more restrictive rules of evidence.
This document provides an introduction to criminal law, including definitions of crimes and differences between civil and criminal law. It outlines key topics like sources of law, purposes of punishment, and classifications of crimes. Criminal law prohibits certain acts and omissions, while criminal procedure governs individuals' rights during the criminal process. Civil law involves private disputes resolved through litigation, with the goal of compensating injuries, while criminal prosecutions are brought by the government to punish wrongdoers and protect the public.
The document provides an overview of the criminal trial process in New South Wales, Australia. It discusses the different courts' jurisdictions and the types of cases they hear. For example, it states that the Local Court hears summary offenses and conducts committal hearings, while the Supreme Court hears the most serious crimes. It also outlines key aspects of the criminal trial process like pleas and charge negotiation, the use of evidence, and the roles of legal personnel and juries. Overall, the document serves as a reference guide to the New South Wales criminal justice system.
Electoral Democracy, Liberal Democracy and the Global Recession of Democracy pastiche_project
Презентація до лекції Ларрі Даймонда "Визначення демократії: виборча, ліберальна демократія, якість демократії", що відбулася в НаУКМА 9 вересня 2013 року у співпраці з Українською школою політичних студій. Ларрі Даймонд розглядає різницю між виборчою та ліберальною демократією та визначає показники оцінки якості демократії. Він також аналізує світові тенденції виборчої і ліберальної демократії та пояснює, чому якість демократії тісно пов'язана зі стабільністю та консолідацією демократії. Ларрі Даймонд є професором Стенфордського університету та старшим науковцем Інституту Гувера. Також він працював в якості радника численних урядових і міжнародних організацій, в тому числі Державного департаменту США, ООН, Світового банку.
U301 part a the victorian criminal justice systemCrystal Delosa
The document provides an overview of key concepts in the Victorian criminal justice system, including the principles of justice (fairness, equality and access), key concepts (distinction between summary and indictable offences, burden of proof, standard of proof, presumption of innocence), rights of the accused and victims, and processes for determining a criminal case. It discusses the roles of institutions like Victoria Legal Aid and community legal centres in assisting those accused of crimes and explains concepts like committal proceedings, plea negotiations and the court hierarchy in Victoria.
U402 a court processes and procedures (working progress)Crystal Delosa
The document discusses key aspects of criminal and civil court processes and procedures. It outlines three elements of an effective legal system: entitlement to a fair hearing, effective access, and timely dispute resolution. For criminal cases, it describes important pre-trial procedures like bail, remand, and committal hearings; and explains their purposes. It also provides an overview of the general purposes of criminal sanctions and three types of sanctions - punishment, denunciation, and protection. For civil cases, it mentions pre-trial procedures like pleadings and discovery.
The document summarizes the two court systems in the United States - federal courts and state courts. Federal courts handle issues that arise under federal law while state courts handle most legal matters that arise within a state's borders, such as family law, criminal cases, and property disputes. The document also describes the structure of trial courts and appellate courts, the burden of proof in civil and criminal cases, and differences between civil and criminal law.
The adversarial system refers to the court acting as an impartial judge between two opposing parties - the prosecution/plaintiff and the defense/defendant. Key features include the parties having control over investigating and presenting their case, the judge ensuring fair compliance with rules of evidence and procedure, the burden being on the prosecution to prove their case, and standards of proof differing between civil and criminal cases. Legal representation is also needed for parties to effectively operate within the adversarial system.
Analysis on The Presentation of Evidence Between the Adversary System in Mala... Selvakumar Balakrishnan
INTRODUCTION
THE ADVERSARIAL SYSTEM IN MALAYSIA
THE INQUISITORIAL SYSTEM IN GENERAL
PRESENTATION OF EVIDENCE IN ADVERSARY SYSTEM IN MALAYSIA
PRESENTATION OF EVIDENCE IN INQUISITORIAL SYSTEM IN GENERAL
THE ADVANTAGES AND DISADVANTAGES OF ADVERSARY SYSTEM
THE ADVANTAGES AND DISADVANTAGES OF INQUISITORIAL SYSTEM
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
The 5 Pillars of Criminal Justice System.pptxNhardzBriones1
The document discusses the 5 pillars of the criminal justice system in the Philippines: law enforcement, prosecution, courts, corrections, and community. It describes the roles and functions of each pillar.
The law enforcement pillar is responsible for crime prevention, enforcement of laws, and gathering evidence for prosecution. The prosecution pillar investigates criminal complaints and prosecutes alleged offenders. The courts pillar adjudicates cases and renders judgments. The corrections pillar oversees prisons, jails, probation, and parole. The community pillar both assists in crime prevention/solving and holds other pillars accountable.
For the criminal justice system to be effective, strong coordination between the pillars is needed, as each depends on the proper functioning of the others due to the
The document lists the members of a group and discusses democracy and elections. It defines democracy as a form of government where citizens have equal say in decisions. It outlines principles of democracy like rule of law, citizen participation, and free and fair elections. The benefits of democracy discussed are protection from oppression and laws that ensure citizen safety. Elections allow citizens to choose representatives and influence policies through voting. Key aspects covered are voting rights, voter registration, and primary vs general elections.
The document discusses issues with the Indian judiciary system including a large backlog of cases, lack of judges, and corruption. It notes that while India has a functioning independent judiciary, efficiency is lacking. Case studies are presented on labor laws that allowed one worker to keep his job for 22 years despite repeated infractions, and the slow trial and lenient sentencing for the juvenile in the high-profile 2012 Delhi gang rape case. Bottlenecks in the system like matrimonial cases and ways to remove them like special fast-track courts are proposed. In summary, the document examines inefficiencies in the Indian judicial system through its large backlog, lack of judges, and case studies, and proposes methods to remove bottlenecks
The document discusses the Right to Information (RTI) Act in India. It notes that the legislative intent of the Act was to promote transparency, accountability, and good governance by giving citizens access to information held by public authorities. However, it argues that more needs to be done to ensure public authorities properly implement the Act through compliance monitoring and redefining ambiguous definitions. The document concludes by thanking the reader and emphasizing that the overall objective of the RTI Act is to enhance good governance in India.
Many people are unfamiliar with the American Criminal Justice System, so this presentation condenses primary and necessary concepts for easy comprehension so that all can understand how the system functions and why!
Disclaimer: this presentation was completed for an in-class assignment at Rockhurst University. The "for Dummies" branding is not my own and was simply used as a format for the assignment concept.
This document provides an overview of comparative law and different legal traditions around the world. It discusses the importance of understanding legal systems other than one's own and describes some key features of the major legal traditions: common law, civil law, socialist law, and Islamic law. For each tradition, it examines historical origins, basic structural features like use of written codes versus precedent, adversarial versus inquisitorial procedures, and role of judicial review. Specific examples are given of legal systems from different countries and cultures to illustrate variations within the overarching traditions.
This document discusses several topics related to law and the legal profession. It begins by outlining different theories of law, such as natural law and positive law. It then discusses legal justifications like the harm principle and legal paternalism. The document also examines perceptions of the judicial system and whether it achieves true justice. It analyzes the roles and ethics of legal professionals like attorneys and judges. Specifically, it debates whether attorneys should serve as legal agents or moral agents. Finally, the document reviews ethical standards and codes of conduct for legal professionals.
This document discusses government structures and institutions. It defines structures as the basic components that allow governments to function, such as legislatures, courts, and bureaucracies. Institutions are more specific organizational structures through which political power is exercised, like the British House of Commons or U.S. Supreme Court. The document also examines how a society's view of human nature is reflected in its political institutions, using the U.S. system as an example that was designed based on a distrustful view of human nature. Finally, it discusses factors involved in choosing government institutions, such as a nation's political culture, basic form of government, and centralization of power.
The document defines key concepts in Indian law such as the roles of courts, judges, and the distinction between civil and criminal justice systems. It also explains important legal terminology and outlines the Indian Penal Code and Code of Criminal Procedure which establish criminal offenses and procedures. The Criminal Procedure Code and Evidence Act have been updated to the Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita, and Bharatiya Sakshya Sanhita respectively.
Strengths and Weakness of the Western Australian Adversarial (1).pptxAndrewBell441612
The document discusses the key aspects of the adversarial court system used in countries like Australia, the UK, Canada, and the US. It outlines that the adversarial system relies on the parties to present evidence and argue their respective positions to the judge or jury, who remain impartial. It also describes the different roles of parties, judges, rules of evidence, and burdens of proof in civil versus criminal cases. The document analyzes both the strengths of the adversarial system in promoting transparency and procedural fairness, and its weaknesses, such as more restrictive rules of evidence.
This document provides an introduction to criminal law, including definitions of crimes and differences between civil and criminal law. It outlines key topics like sources of law, purposes of punishment, and classifications of crimes. Criminal law prohibits certain acts and omissions, while criminal procedure governs individuals' rights during the criminal process. Civil law involves private disputes resolved through litigation, with the goal of compensating injuries, while criminal prosecutions are brought by the government to punish wrongdoers and protect the public.
The document provides an overview of the criminal trial process in New South Wales, Australia. It discusses the different courts' jurisdictions and the types of cases they hear. For example, it states that the Local Court hears summary offenses and conducts committal hearings, while the Supreme Court hears the most serious crimes. It also outlines key aspects of the criminal trial process like pleas and charge negotiation, the use of evidence, and the roles of legal personnel and juries. Overall, the document serves as a reference guide to the New South Wales criminal justice system.
Electoral Democracy, Liberal Democracy and the Global Recession of Democracy pastiche_project
Презентація до лекції Ларрі Даймонда "Визначення демократії: виборча, ліберальна демократія, якість демократії", що відбулася в НаУКМА 9 вересня 2013 року у співпраці з Українською школою політичних студій. Ларрі Даймонд розглядає різницю між виборчою та ліберальною демократією та визначає показники оцінки якості демократії. Він також аналізує світові тенденції виборчої і ліберальної демократії та пояснює, чому якість демократії тісно пов'язана зі стабільністю та консолідацією демократії. Ларрі Даймонд є професором Стенфордського університету та старшим науковцем Інституту Гувера. Також він працював в якості радника численних урядових і міжнародних організацій, в тому числі Державного департаменту США, ООН, Світового банку.
U301 part a the victorian criminal justice systemCrystal Delosa
The document provides an overview of key concepts in the Victorian criminal justice system, including the principles of justice (fairness, equality and access), key concepts (distinction between summary and indictable offences, burden of proof, standard of proof, presumption of innocence), rights of the accused and victims, and processes for determining a criminal case. It discusses the roles of institutions like Victoria Legal Aid and community legal centres in assisting those accused of crimes and explains concepts like committal proceedings, plea negotiations and the court hierarchy in Victoria.
U402 a court processes and procedures (working progress)Crystal Delosa
The document discusses key aspects of criminal and civil court processes and procedures. It outlines three elements of an effective legal system: entitlement to a fair hearing, effective access, and timely dispute resolution. For criminal cases, it describes important pre-trial procedures like bail, remand, and committal hearings; and explains their purposes. It also provides an overview of the general purposes of criminal sanctions and three types of sanctions - punishment, denunciation, and protection. For civil cases, it mentions pre-trial procedures like pleadings and discovery.
The document summarizes the two court systems in the United States - federal courts and state courts. Federal courts handle issues that arise under federal law while state courts handle most legal matters that arise within a state's borders, such as family law, criminal cases, and property disputes. The document also describes the structure of trial courts and appellate courts, the burden of proof in civil and criminal cases, and differences between civil and criminal law.
Similar to Politics and Law Exam Preparation.pptx (20)
Business law for the students of undergraduate level. The presentation contains the summary of all the chapters under the syllabus of State University, Contract Act, Sale of Goods Act, Negotiable Instrument Act, Partnership Act, Limited Liability Act, Consumer Protection Act.
The Future of Criminal Defense Lawyer in India.pdfveteranlegal
https://veteranlegal.in/defense-lawyer-in-india/ | Criminal defense Lawyer in India has always been a vital aspect of the country's legal system. As defenders of justice, criminal Defense Lawyer play a critical role in ensuring that individuals accused of crimes receive a fair trial and that their constitutional rights are protected. As India evolves socially, economically, and technologically, the role and future of criminal Defense Lawyer are also undergoing significant changes. This comprehensive blog explores the current landscape, challenges, technological advancements, and prospects for criminal Defense Lawyer in India.
Genocide in International Criminal Law.pptxMasoudZamani13
Excited to share insights from my recent presentation on genocide! 💡 In light of ongoing debates, it's crucial to delve into the nuances of this grave crime.
Sangyun Lee, 'Why Korea's Merger Control Occasionally Fails: A Public Choice ...Sangyun Lee
Presentation slides for a session held on June 4, 2024, at Kyoto University. This presentation is based on the presenter’s recent paper, coauthored with Hwang Lee, Professor, Korea University, with the same title, published in the Journal of Business Administration & Law, Volume 34, No. 2 (April 2024). The paper, written in Korean, is available at <https://shorturl.at/GCWcI>.
Receivership and liquidation Accounts
Being a Paper Presented at Business Recovery and Insolvency Practitioners Association of Nigeria (BRIPAN) on Friday, August 18, 2023.
सुप्रीम कोर्ट ने यह भी माना था कि मजिस्ट्रेट का यह कर्तव्य है कि वह सुनिश्चित करे कि अधिकारी पीएमएलए के तहत निर्धारित प्रक्रिया के साथ-साथ संवैधानिक सुरक्षा उपायों का भी उचित रूप से पालन करें।
Pedal to the Court Understanding Your Rights after a Cycling Collision.pdfSunsetWestLegalGroup
The immediate step is an intelligent choice; don’t procrastinate. In the aftermath of the crash, taking care of yourself and taking quick steps can help you protect yourself from significant injuries. Make sure that you have collected the essential data and information.
3. Representation
• Representation and Justice are two vital concepts in a Liberal democracy
• In liberalism, the individual is at the heart of political life, and rights and
obligations are at the heart of justice through its legal systems.
• For a ‘representative democracy’ to work in the interest of citizens, there
must be fair elections.
• Elections must accurately reflect electors’ choices an deliver stable
government and accountability.
4. Origins
• Representation is the critical idea that distinguishes modern democracies
from the democracies of Ancient Athens.
• In Ancient Athens all citizens participated directly in their government by
presenting themselves in person at the citizens assembly (the Ekklesia).
• All citizens voted on laws and took turns in the executive.
• To ensure that they achieved direct democracy in their large city-state, the
Athenians proposed strict limits on citizenship.
5. Strict
Limits
• These strict limits on citizenship was imposed
so that the Athenians Government did not
become unmanageable.
• This meant that the following people could
not present themselves in the Ekklesia:
1. No Women
2. No foreign born residents
3. No Slaves
• These strict rules limited the number of
people allowed to directly participate in
government.
6. Which System of government is best for
individual liberty?
• This question was investigated by a philosopher called John Stuart Mills.
• He realised that Athenian direct democracy couldn’t work in todays society as
there were too many citizens for a modern day Ekklesia.
• Mills wrote a book where he argued for a new form of democratic
government.
• Mills posed the solution to the problem of having too many citizens
‘presenting’ themselves in person by suggesting that many citizens choose a
few to ‘re-represent’ them in a representative assembly.
7. Representative Assembly
• In this scenario citizens would present their concerns to one citizen to re-
represent them to a representative assembly.
• In this way a large population of citizens could participate in their
government is the ultimate essence of democracy.
• This idea was to replace citizens being physically present in an assembly and
instead being re-represented by someone chosen by them.
8. Delegation
and
trusteeship
Delegation and trusteeship are the links which
bind a body of citizens to their representatives.
• To delegate is to give your authority to act on
your behalf; and
• To entrust is to place your confidence in
another to act in your best interest (not their
own or other interests) – they are a trustee.
Representatives elected by citizens may act as
delegates or trustees or both.
9. Representation and fair election
Electoral systems are the means by which citizens delegate or entrust representatives to
stand for them in parliament.
The electoral system is a powerful tool ensuring that representatives are accountable for
their jobs of representing the people.
Electors can remove poor representatives by electing others to replace them.
Or they can keep them by re-electing them.
10. Essential Characteristics of fair electoral systems
Having an electoral system is so important that they need to be effective or good.
A set of criteria is needed to evaluate an electoral system.
Characteristics of a good system include:
1. Providing political choice
2. Value votes equally and be fair to political parties;
3. Create stable government; and
4. Facilitate accountability.
11. Characteristics of a fair electoral system
• There are many different electoral systems throughout the world.
• Combining all four ideal characteristics in one electoral system is almost
impossible.
• This means that not all electoral systems are equally effective.
• Furthermore, there is not one ideal or perfect electoral system in the world.
• Some of the most common failings of democratic systems around the world
stem from the electoral systems used to choose representative governments.
28. What is the Inquisitorial System
• A method of legal practice in which the judge endeavors to discover facts
while simultaneously representing the interests of the state in a trial.
• The inquisitorial system can be defined by comparison with the adversarial,
or accusatorial, system used in the Australia, United States and Great Britain.
• In the inquisitorial system, the presiding 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.
29. The Origins
• The inquisitorial system was first developed by the Catholic Church during
the medieval period.
• The ecclesiastical courts in thirteenth-century England adopted the method
of adjudication by requiring witnesses and defendants to take an inquisitorial
oath administered by the judge, who then questioned the witnesses.
• The system flourished in England into the sixteenth century, when it became
infamous for its use in the Court of the star chamber, a court reserved for
complex, contested cases.
30. The Origins
• Under the reign of King Henry VIII, the power of the Star Chamber was
expanded, and the court used torture to compel the taking of the
inquisitorial oath.
• The Star Chamber was eventually eliminated as repugnant to basic liberty,
and England gradually moved toward an adversarial system.
31. The Evolution of the Inquisitorial system.
• After the French Revolution, a more refined version of the inquisitorial
system developed in France and Germany.
• From there it spread to the rest of continental Europe and to many African,
South American, and Asian countries.
• The inquisitorial system is now more widely used than the adversarial system.
• Some countries, such as Italy, use a blend of adversarial and inquisitorial
elements in their court system.
32. The Inconsistencies
• The court procedures in an inquisitorial system vary from country to
country.
• Most inquisitorial systems provide a full review of a case by an appeals court.
33. Criminal Trials
• In most inquisitorial systems, a criminal defendant does not have to answer
questions about the crime itself but may be required to answer all other
questions at trial.
• Many of these other questions concern the defendant’s history and would be
considered irrelevant and inadmissible in an adversarial system.
• A criminal defendant in an inquisitorial system is the first to testify.
34. Criminal Trials
• The defendant is allowed to see the government’s case before testifying and
is usually eager to give her or his side of the story.
• In an adversarial system, the defendant is not required to testify and is not
entitled to a complete examination of the government’s case.
• A trial in an inquisitorial system may last for months as the presiding judge
gathers evidence in a series of hearings.
35. Presumption of Innocence
• A criminal defendant is not presumed guilty in an inquisitorial system.
• since a case would not be brought against a defendant unless there is
evidence indicating guilt, the system does not require the presumption of
innocence that is fundamental to the adversarial system.
36. Decisions
• The decision in an inquisitorial criminal trial is made by the collective vote of a
certain number of professional judges and a small group of lay assessors (persons
selected at random from the population).
• Neither the prosecution nor the defendant has an opportunity to question the lay
assessors for bias.
• judges vote after the lay assessor's vote, so that they do not influence the
conclusions of the lay assessors.
• A two-thirds majority is usually required to convict a criminal defendant, whereas a
unanimous verdict is the norm in an adversarial system.
37. The Parquet
• This is a division of experts trained as investigating judges
• It is also known as a standing judiciary.
• Although it is called a standing judiciary, members of the parquet are not
trial judges or part of the judicial arm of government
• The parquet is a branch of French executive (The Government).
• It acts like the department of public prosecution in WA
38. Roles of the parquet
• It fulfils the roles of the prosecutors and magistrates in minor offences.
• This is similar to summary offences in Australia.
• The parquet performs a combined judicial and executive function when resolving minor
criminal cases.
• In more serious criminal cases there is a stronger separation of executive and judicial
functions.
• The parquet is responsible for initiating the trial.
• As the accusing party, a member of the parquet must start a trial by conducting an initial
investigation to determine if the case should be referred to a judge instructeur.
39. The Judge Instructeur
• The parquet commences a criminal trial by seizing a judge instructeur.
• This is a formal procedure performed by requesting a Judge Instructeur to carry any act that will assist in
discovering the truth.
• A Judge Instructeur is not part of the parquet, they are part of the separate judiciary.
• The Judge Instructeur is the trial judge.
• Once a Judge Instructeur takes action to discover the truth, the machinery of trial is engaged by law and
cannot be stopped.
• Actions of the Judge Instructeur can be appealed by the parquet, but the trial itself is now independent of
the parties and in the hands of the judiciary.
• Even an admission of guilt by the defendant will not end the trial, nor can the parquet abandon a trial.
40. Roles of the judge instructeur
• Direct the police to investigate and gather evidence
• Direct the gendarmerie to investigate and gather evidence
• Interview witnesses and take their statements in written form,
• Order a confrontation,
• Interrogate the defendant in camera and not under oath, but with the defendants legal representative present,
• Decide if the defendant has a case to answer,
• Issue warrants to facilitate the collection of evidence,
• Order expert reports,
• Select evidence to include in the dossier
• Widen the scope of the inquiry
41. The Defence
• Once a case has been referred to a judge instructeur the defence has more
power.
• It can request investigations, interviews, and confrontations.
• A confrontation is a meeting of the accused and the victim for a discussion.
• The defence can only request the judge to investigate. It cannot do its own
investigation.
• There is no pleading of not guilty. However, a defence can plead guilty.
42. Pleading Guilty
• Pleading guilty is limited in the following ways:
1. Defendant under the age of 18 cannot plead guilty
2. Defendant accused of certain crimes (such as breaching press laws, manslaughter, and
political misdemeanours) cannot plead guilty,
3. The guilty plea can only be made with the agreement of the parquet,
4. A rejected guilty plea is not recorded in the dossier and thus cannot be used as evidence in
the trial,
5. A successful guilty plea does not necessarily end a trial, the investigation may continue
under the judge instructeur until there is satisfaction of sufficient evidence is gathered.
43. Rights of the accused
• The accused has the right to assistance by a lawyer
• A right to silence
• A presumption of innocence
• A right to know the allegations against them
• The right to legal assistance can be temporarily suspended (12 hours for minor and
24 hours for serious matters) by the parquet if considered necessary because of an
urgent need to gather evidence in order to prevent another offence from occurring.
44. Evidence
• The best French translation of the English word ‘evidence’ is prevue or
‘proof’.
• The phrase ‘evidence of proof by any means’ is better thought of as the
‘most obvious conclusion suggested’.
• It is important to note the difference in attitudes to the quality of evidence
suggested by this definition.
• This system of judiciary admits any relevant evidence rather than the high
standards of evidence used in the adversarial system.
45. Witnesses
• Most evidence is written and contained within the dossier.
• A testimony orally from a witness can however be used as evidence, especially in the
assize courts.
• The witness testimony is in the form of ‘telling their story’ rather than answering
questions.
• Witnesses will tell their story uninterrupted by questions from the parties or the
judge instructeur.
• Witness evidence is not subject to rigorous testing through cross examination.
47. What is the
Adversarial
System
• The Adversarial system is the term used for any
countries that use the system of law known as the
‘Common Law’ system.
• Countries that use this legal system are:
1. Australia
2. UK
3. Canada
4. USA
• Adversarial means that each party to the case
presents argument and evidence in support of his
or her version of events to the court, and the
court decides whether the party that commenced
proceedings has proved their version of events to
the relevant standard.
48. Adversarial Systems
The court can only make
decisions on the issues that the
parties indicate to the court are
in dispute and decides only
based on the evidence and
argument presented to the
court by the parties.
The court does not conduct its
own investigation or construct
its own version of events.
49. Adversarial System
In most cases a judge or magistrate alone will hear the evidence and make the decision in a
case.
They are also responsible for imposing sentences in criminal cases.
In some cases, superior courts may sit with more than one judge (for example the High
Court or Federal Court sitting as a Full Court).
Juries are used for serious (‘indictable’) criminal cases, and for some civil and coronial cases.
50. Criminal vs
Civil
• Civil law is about resolving disputes, while
criminal law deals with crime.
• Civil law deals with relationships, agreements
and obligations between two or more parties,
covering a wide range of formal and informal
duties, obligations and rights:
i. Formal – terms, conditions and requirements
explicitly set out by contract or other
agreements
ii. Informal – obligations that aren’t written down,
but which are expected nonetheless
• By contrast, the purpose of criminal law is to
protect the community and punish the
perpetrators of crime.
• While civil cases are between individual parties,
criminal cases pit someone accused of a crime
against the community as a whole.
51. Remedies
and
Penalties
• The purpose of civil penalties is to
restore the affected party and to as best
as possible undo the harm caused by
the issue that triggered the civil case.
• While monetary compensation is the
most common remedy ordered by civil
courts, it can take all sorts of different
shapes, including transfer of assets and
property, as well as orders to stop or
commence work (all of which are
delivered directly to the plaintiff).
52. Criminal
Remedies
• By contrast, the purpose of legal
remedies in criminal cases are to:
i. Punish the offender
ii. Remove the offender from the community
iii. Deter other offenders
iv. Protect the community
v. Attempt to rehabilitate the offender
• Because of these different goals, the
penalties used in criminal law are
different from the ones in civil law.
53. Criminal remedies
• Each crime comes with a range of prescribed penalties as laid out
under the law of the specific jurisdiction, and may include:
i. Fines
ii. Prison time and suspended sentences
iii. Community service
iv. Mandated therapy
v. Suspension of drivers licenses
54. WA Court System
• In Western Australia we have 6 main courts these include:
• Superior courts (Supreme Court of Western Australia, Family Court of
Western Australia).
• Intermediate Courts (District Court, Children’s Court of Western Australia)
• Inferior Courts (Magistrates court, Coroners Court)
• All main courts have a criminal and a civil division.
55. Rules of
Evidence
in an
adversarial
system
• In the English language the definition of evidence is
“body of facts indicating whether an allegation is true”.
• Obviousness is a less damming definition.
• In the adversarial system evidence is:
i. collected by the parties
ii. Strict rules are given to what can be used to ensure
the quality of evidence.
iii. Parties must object to evidence if the judge is to
make a ruling on the validity of the evidence.
iv. High reliance on oral evidence, but importance of
written evidence is growing.
v. Witnesses answer questions asked by parties
vi. Character of defendant is not allowed as evidence.
56. Burden of Proof
• In Criminal cases the burden of proof is beyond reasonable doubt.
• This means that the onus of proof is extremely high.
• This is not the case for civil trials where the onus of proof is the balance of
probability.
• In the adversarial system the burden of proof rests with the prosecuting
party, the defendant has no burden of proof.
• This can be seen as an accused is innocent until proven guilty.
57. Roles of the Judge in adversarial systems
• The role of the judge is impartial to the case and should bear no bias.
• In the adversarial system judges are also known as passive judges meaning they do
not investigate nor do they question witnesses.
• Judges do not introduce evidence in the adversarial system nor do they compile
evidence or direct trials.
• The judge merely oversees the contest between two competing parties ensuring
both sides adhere to strict processes that enable procedural fairness.
• The judge is a neutral referee.
58. Roles of
the judge
in an
adversarial
system.
• Judges must also explain the reason for their
decisions. (Ratio Decidendi)
• This is the process of making sure judicial
thinking is transparent and subject to appeal
by either parties.
59. Role of the
Parties
• The prosecution (or plaintiff) and defence run the case.
• Each party must:
i. Find and present evidence
ii. Call and question witnesses
iii. Test evidence through cross examination
iv. Object to evidence that may contravene the rules of
evidence
v. Argue the meaning and interpretation of the law
vi. Open and close the case.
• Either party can close the case without any consent of the
judge
• The prosecution does this by abandoning the trial.
• The defence does this by pleading guilty
• The same power exists in civil trials, or they may reach an
agreement to resolve a dispute out of court.
60. Questions
1. Discuss the ‘rules of evidence’ in the
adversarial system.
2. Explain what is meant by the presumption
of innocence.
3. Investigate the rules of evidence in the
adversarial system and describe key strengths
and weaknesses of these features.
4. How is transparency and openness evident
in the adversarial system.