25 Feb Choose a country that utilizes the inquisitorial system and compare it against the system used in the United States
Order Instructions
Week 2 Discussion
Discussion Topic
Task: Reply to this topic
The discussion assignment provides a forum for discussing relevant topics for this week based on the course competencies covered.
For this assignment, make sure you post your initial response to the Discussion Area by the due date assigned.
To support your work, use your course and text readings and also use outside sources. As in all assignments, cite your sources in your work and provide references for the citations in APA format.
Start reviewing and responding to the postings of your classmates as early in the week as possible. Respond to at least two of your classmates. Participate in the discussion by asking a question, providing a statement of clarification, providing a point of view with a rationale, challenging an aspect of the discussion, or indicating a relationship between two or more lines of reasoning in the discussion. Complete your participation for this assignment by the end of the week.
Legal Systems
This week, you have learned about the inquisitorial and the adversarial legal systems. Choose a country that utilizes the inquisitorial system and compare it against the system used in the United States. Then, respond to the following:
Which system do you think better protects the defendant? Which system seems to have a better chance of getting to the “truth”? Justify.
Are there any aspects of the inquisitorial system that could be brought into the adversarial system to improve it? Explain.
Should the same system be used for both criminal and civil cases, or would it be better to have one system for criminal matters and the other system for civil matters? Why or why not?
SAMPLE ANSWER
One country that utilizes the inquisitorial system is France, while the United States uses the adversarial system. In the inquisitorial system, the judge plays an active role in the proceedings, gathering evidence and questioning witnesses to ascertain the truth. On the other hand, in the adversarial system, the judge acts as an impartial referee while lawyers for the prosecution and defense present their cases and evidence to a jury.
Regarding the protection of the defendant, the inquisitorial system may be more favorable, as the judge takes a more active role in ensuring the defendant’s rights are protected. In France, for example, defendants have the right to remain silent and the right to an attorney, and the judge will ensure that these rights are respected. In contrast, the adversarial system places the burden of protecting the defendant’s rights on the defense attorney, who must challenge the prosecution’s case and evidence.
In terms of getting to the truth, the inquisitorial system may have an advantage, as the judge has the ability to gather and consider evidence that may not be admissible in the adversarial system. In France, for example, the judge can order investigations and question witnesses who may have relevant information, even if they were not called by either the prosecution or defense.
However, the adversarial system may be more effective in ensuring a fair and unbiased trial, as both sides have the opportunity to present their cases and challenge each other’s evidence. This system also places a high value on the right to a fair trial, as the prosecution must prove their case beyond a reasonable doubt.
There are aspects of the inquisitorial system that could be brought into the adversarial system to improve it. For example, the judge in the adversarial system could be given a more active role in ensuring that both sides follow the rules and that the defendant’s rights are respected. Additionally, the adversarial system could allow for more judicial discretion in determining which evidence is admissible, similar to the inquisitorial system.
As for whether the same system should be used for both criminal and civil cases, it may be better to have different systems for each. Criminal cases typically involve the state prosecuting an individual for a crime, while civil cases involve private parties seeking resolution to a dispute. The adversarial system may be more appropriate for criminal cases, where the state must prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt, while the inquisitorial system may be more appropriate for civil cases, where the judge can play a more active role in ensuring a fair resolution to the dispute.
References:
France Diplomatie. (n.d.). The French judicial system. Retrieved from https://www.diplomatie.gouv.fr/en/coming-to-france/practical-info/the-french-judicial-system/
Legal Information Institute. (n.d.). Adversary system. Retrieved from https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/adversary_system
