ABSTRACT
Criminal trial systems differ vastly around the world. From indigenous ‘sentencing circles’ used in North America to the Islamic courts of the Middle East and parts of Africa and Asia, societies have long striven for the best way to do justice. In the Western world, two major ‘families’ of trial system prevail. These are known as the adversarial and inquisitorial methods, and differ substantially in terms of both their procedures and underlying rationales. This chapter contains an overview of the adversarial nature of the English criminal trial. It begins by outlining the course of the trial, and highlights how it is structurally geared to maximise the power of the parties (i.e. the prosecution and defence). It then proceeds to highlight some of the most prominent structures and processes that are corollaries of adversarial label. Next, we consider a number of pertinent questions relating to the rationale for the adversarial mode of trial: why, for example, does the ‘fi ght’ theory continue to prevail in law while inquiries are typically favoured in many other disciplines? Does (or should) the adversarial model enhance prospects for truth-fi nding? Finally, we consider the operation of one of the main alternative models, the inquisitorial paradigm, which is followed in most continental legal systems. How does such a system work in practice, and is it better placed to do ‘justice’ than its adversarial counterpart?
