To see the other types of publications on this topic, follow the link: Adversarial proceedings.
Journal articles on the topic 'Adversarial proceedings'
Create a spot-on reference in APA, MLA, Chicago, Harvard, and other styles
Consult the top 50 journal articles for your research on the topic 'Adversarial proceedings.'
Next to every source in the list of references, there is an 'Add to bibliography' button. Press on it, and we will generate automatically the bibliographic reference to the chosen work in the citation style you need: APA, MLA, Harvard, Chicago, Vancouver, etc.
You can also download the full text of the academic publication as pdf and read online its abstract whenever available in the metadata.
Browse journal articles on a wide variety of disciplines and organise your bibliography correctly.
1
Попова, Ирина, and Анастасия Иванова. "THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE ADVERSARIAL PRINCIPLE AT THE PRE-TRIAL STAGES OF CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS IN THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION AND IN FOREIGN COUNTRIES." Rule-of-law state: theory and practice 16, no. 3 (March 1, 2020): 108–19. http://dx.doi.org/10.33184/pravgos-2020.3.12.
Full textAbstract:
To achieve the purpose of criminal proceedings, law enforcers must have an arsenal of procedural tools in order to ensure the operation of the legal regulation mechanism. The system of principles of criminal proceedings, serving as the basis for the effective operation of the norms of criminal procedure law, includes the adversarial principle. The implementation of this principle has a number of features in pre-trial proceedings. In this aspect, a comparative study of the adversarial principle in national criminal proceedings and in foreign criminal proceedings is of both scientific and practical interest. Purpose: analysis of the adversarial principle at the pre-trial stages in national and foreign criminal proceedings, as an element of the legal regulation mechanism. Methods: dialectic methods as a general scientific method of cognition, as well as specific scientific methods: interpretation method, comparative legal, technical legal, formal logical in their various combinations. Results: the study reveals that the adversarial principle operates in various types of criminal process in the mechanism of legal regulation of Russia and foreign countries. To achieve the social purpose of criminal proceedings, which provides for the protection of rights and legitimate interests, the adversarial principle must be implemented, including at the pre-trial stages of criminal proceedings.
2
Cvorovic, Zoran. "Contemporary reform of the criminal proceedings in the Republic of Serbia: Legal history view." Zbornik Matice srpske za drustvene nauke, no. 154 (2016): 19–36. http://dx.doi.org/10.2298/zmsdn1654019c.
Full textAbstract:
This article aims to review some solutions in the Criminal Procedure Code (CPC) from 2011, which represents breaking with former Serbian and Yugoslav tradition in criminal proceedings. These are, primarily, novelties related to opportunism in prosecution, plea bargaining and presentation of evidence by parties that all devalue principles of material truth determination in proceedings. This work establishes connection between the aforementioned solutions of Serbian legislator and the development of continental European criminal proceeding over centuries. Comparative historical legal analysis of these norms in the Serbian CPC begins with the key turning point in the development of the continental European criminal proceedings - suppression of the adversarial system by the inquisitorial proceedings in the XVI and XVII centuries. As this change has been closely related to the transition of, up to then, dominant type of states (feudal mosaic states to absolute monarchies), these modern changes in criminal proceedings are analyzed not only from the point of view of criminal procedure evolution, but also from the point of view of the evolution of states. In England, country of origin of Anglo-Saxon civilization, the old adversarial system was not transformed into inquisitorial, contrary to the development of the continental criminal proceedings. This transformation was prevented by Puritan revolution, similarly as it prevented the transformation of English state into absolute monarchy. Continental and Anglo-Saxon criminal proceedings have developed as two completely separate systems since then. This article further elaborates some of the key criminal law traditions in continental criminal proceedings and substantive criminal law which resulted from the introduction of the inquisitorial proceedings: development of complicity and guilt as institutes, final suppression of self-representation, incrimination of false testimony and perjury. These are directly related to the active role assigned to court in inquisitorial proceedings, and to court?s obligation to determine material truth. Changes in the role of court also result from the change of states; while weak feudal states were satisfied with passive courts, powerful absolute monarchies demanded courts with active role in all phases of proceedings. Modern Americanization of some European proceeding regulations, as it is the case in Serbia, brings discontinuation in legal proceeding tradition of these states, but also, necessarily, influences regression into domination of adversarial proceedings character?ized by passive court. In continental tradition it also consequently indicates a weak state.
3
Striletska, Oksana. "Establishment and Development of the Adversarial Principle in the Criminal Process." Path of Science 7, no. 7 (July 31, 2021): 1010–16. http://dx.doi.org/10.22178/pos.72-2.
Full textAbstract:
The article is devoted to studying the history of the origin and development of adversarial principles in criminal proceedings. The evolution of the adversarial principle in the criminal process is studied in chronological order, in historical retrospective. Based on the development of legal regulations and the level of public administration, specific historical periods related to the development of the adversarial principle in criminal proceedings are distinguished. A retrospective suggests that adversarial proceedings should be taken as the basis for the organization of the entire criminal process. Only in this case, it is possible to clearly separate the functions of prosecution, defence, and resolution of criminal proceedings at all its stages and give the parties equal opportunities to provide evidence and defend their positions.
4
Gertner, Nancy, and Joseph Sanders. "Alternatives to Traditional Adversary Methods of Presenting Scientific Expertise in the Legal System." Daedalus 147, no. 4 (October 2018): 135–51. http://dx.doi.org/10.1162/daed_a_00525.
Full textAbstract:
The twin goals of any litigation are to arrive at a correct outcome and provide the parties with a sense that they were treated justly, even if they do not prevail. Adversarial proceedings are often perceived to be superior to inquisitorial proceedings with respect to the second goal but inferior with respect to the first. This is especially the case when proceedings involve expert testimony. In this essay, we discuss several relatively minor changes to typical adversarial processes that offer the potential of improving trial accuracy without disrupting the overall structure of adversarial proceedings. These changes include 1) alterations to the organization of the trial, including concurrent expert testimony; 2) alterations to the role of the jury, including taking notes, asking questions, and receiving written expert reports; and 3) formal expert witness codes of conduct designed to better arm experts to resist the adversarial pressures that lead to biased testimony.
5
Tomak, Anastasiya Ivanovna. "The prerequisites for changing the mechanism of implementation of adversarial principle as the backbone of justice in the information and communication society." Право и политика, no. 5 (May 2021): 51–59. http://dx.doi.org/10.7256/2454-0706.2021.5.35651.
Full textAbstract:
The advancement of informatization leads to the information society, which is a global trend of information civilization. Present time marks the new information stage of social development, which should be defined as information society, where information and knowledge are the key object of labor of the majority of population, and information technologies are a direct instrument of labor. In this regard, civil proceedings, which is founded on the adversarial principle, also takes the vector towards the information component. The adversarial principle, is in turn is influenced by objective factors (social relations) and subjective factors (attitude towards the right of subjects), which is the basis for changing the mechanism of its implementation. This directly affect the conduct of judicial proceedings and legal enforcement of adversarial principle. The author determines the key trends in adaptation of the means of implementation of adversarial principle in civil proceedings in the conditions of the use of information technologies. The author suggest dividing the means of implementation of adversarial principle into two groups: for creating an environment of trust and communication interaction between the participants and the court. Based on this, the article analyzes the possible impact of information technologies upon the adversarial principle in civil proceedings, as well as the mechanism of its implementation. The conclusion is made that the adversarial principle in civil proceedings can fall under influence of information technologies, since its essence is formed from objective and subjective factors; while the means of its implementation, which comprise the legal measures of its mechanism through adaptation of information technologies in justice, are susceptible to change.
6
Smith, Stanley K. "Expert testimony in adversarial legal proceedings." Population Research and Policy Review 12, no. 1 (1993): 43–52. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/bf01074508.
Full text
7
Burmagin, S. V. "Metamorphoses of an Adversarial Nature of Criminal Proceedings in Cases of Judicial Review." Lex Russica 1, no. 2 (February 28, 2020): 44–62. http://dx.doi.org/10.17803/1729-5920.2020.159.2.044-062.
Full textAbstract:
An adversarial nature of any judicial proceedings, which is characteristic of justice and corresponds to its nature, is revealed in criminal proceedings not only in criminal cases, but also in so called cases of judicial review exercised during pre-trial proceedings. In the present paper the features of adversarial construction of judicial review proceedings in the Russian criminal process are investigated in the context of the purpose and subject of judicial review at pre-trial stages. The author has analyzed the specifics of the conflict relationship, the essence of the legal dispute and the subject composition of the procedural parties in cases of judicial review, as well as the peculiarities of initiating the judicial review proceedings and distribution of the burden of proof between the parties; reveals the transformation of the procedural roles of the main participants of the adversarial proceedings when the disputed issue is transfered from the main proceedings in the criminal case for consideration in the procedure of judicial review within the framework of separate proceedings. The paper also elucidates such features characteristic for certain forms of judicial review as involvement of third parties having their own interest in the judicial review case and restriction of participation in the court session of the interested party. The paper focuses on the problem of ambiguous (from the standpoint of the principle of adversariality) procedural status of the prosecutor in judicial and review proceedings in which independent parties are the investigator and (or) the head of the investigative body. Alternative options for elimination of the problem discussed above are proposed. It is concluded that in the course of normative regulation of judicial review procedures and law enforcement, it is necessary to take into account the specifics of cases of judicial review and the originality of manifestation of adversarial foundation in such cases.
8
Burmagin, S. V. "Problematic Issues of Adversarial Construction of Judicial Proceedings at the Stage of Execution of the Sentence." Actual Problems of Russian Law 15, no. 9 (September 29, 2020): 93–103. http://dx.doi.org/10.17803/1994-1471.2020.118.9.093-103.
Full textAbstract:
An adversarial nature of any trial, characteristic of justice and corresponding to its nature, is manifested in criminal proceedings not only in criminal cases, but also in cases addressing issues related to the execution of the sentence. The paper examines the peculiarities of the adversarial construction of judicial proceedings at the stage of execution of the sentence pre-conditioned by the tasks and the specific subject of judicial proceedings in a particular category of cases. The author elucidates the specifics of the conflict relationship, the essence of the legal dispute and the subject composition of procedural parties in cases where issues related to the execution of punishment are resolved. Also, the author analyzes the problems of ensuring equality of the parties and the undefined role of the prosecutor at the execution stage, suggests ways to address them at the legislative level. Finally, it is concluded that there is a need to improve the procedural form of dealing with issues related to the execution of sentences in accordance with the principles of adversarial proceedings and equality and taking into account the peculiarities of their manifestations in judicial proceedings arising during the execution of the sentence.
9
Petrakova, S. A. "Evolution of the adversary (on the example of criminal proceedings)." Institute Bulletin: Crime, Punishment, Correction 13, no. 2 (July 19, 2019): 222–28. http://dx.doi.org/10.46741/2076-4162-2019-13-2-222-228.
Full textAbstract:
Adversary in juridical science cannot be considered separately from the judicial system, because the changes that took place in the judicial process had an irreversible impact on the evolution of adversarial proceedings. This provision is proved in legal practice. The evolution of competition in criminal proceedings is investigated in chronological order, in historical retrospect. At the beginning of statehood when democratic principles prevailed in society, trials were based on adversarial principles, the court played the role of an impartial arbitrator, and the outcome of the case was determined by the evidence collected by the plaintiffs and defendants. In the process of strengthening of the state, the court has become an active subject of judicial investigations and by the end of the XVII century the state displaces the adversary system of trial, replacing it to prove the guilt of the accused of the results of the investigation: torture, interrogations, etc. Only in the second half of the XIX century in the proceedings returned adversary, but not for long. During the soviet period previous achievements in the field of justice were eradicated. The restoration of adversarial proceedings in legislation and judicial practice began in the early 1990s in the process of judicial reform, which was carried out in order to improve the efficiency of judicial proceedings. At present it is safe to say that the potential of the adversarial principle has not yet been sufficiently disclosed.
10
Misztal-Konecka, Joanna. "O OBOWIĄZYWANIU ZASADY KONTRADYKTORYJNOŚCI W POSTĘPOWANIU NIEPROCESOWYM: PRZYCZYNEK DO DYSKUSJI." Zeszyty Prawnicze 16, no. 3 (December 10, 2016): 137. http://dx.doi.org/10.21697/zp.2016.16.3.06.
Full textAbstract:
The Adversarial Principle in Non-litigious Proceedings: a Contribution to the Discussion Summary The adversarial principle has been applicable in Polish non-litigious proceedings since 1964, when the provisions for litigious and non-litigious proceedings in Polish civil law were integrated in one civil code, and later when its procedural law was fundamentally revised and amended. Prior to this change, the applicable provisions were defined in the 1945 Code for non-litigious proceedings, which did not admit the adversary system, viz. the principle that the parties to proceedings collect evidence and produce witnesses, while the court merely assists and supervises. There are only two situations in which under current Polish civil law the inquisitorial system may supersede the adversary ststem. The two exceptions are: 1) when ex officio proceedings may be initiated on the grounds of a legislative act; and 2) when it is in the public interest to initiate an ex officio inquiry.
11
Plakhotnik, O. V. "THEORY OF GAMES IN THE CRIMINAL PROCESS OF UKRAINE." Criminalistics and Forensics, no. 64 (May 7, 2019): 294–305. http://dx.doi.org/10.33994/kndise.2019.64.26.
Full textAbstract:
The purpose of this article is to reveal the possibility of using game theory in the criminal process of Ukraine. The article deals with the adversarial principle of the criminal proceedings. The presence of conflicting interests of both sides gives rise to the procedural interests of each of them. Defending legal positions with due regard for procedural interests leads to rational behavior of the both sides. Such activities can be called strategic, and the process of achieving the interests of the both sides in criminal proceedings is the strategy of the sides to criminal proceedings. Both sides in criminal proceedings will develop optimal strategies for achieving the appropriate procedural goal. The choice of the optimal strategy of the prosecution or the defense allows you to use game theory, as the theory of mathematical models for making optimal decisions in the context of a divergence of interests of the both sides in criminal proceedings. The article provides a definition of strategy and a definition of Game Theory. Conflicts that are considered in game theory are compared by analogy with a dispute in a criminal proceeding. The work of B.D. Leonov “The role of the theory of strategic behavior (game theory) in the regulation of the fight against terrorism” about the fact that game theory helps to choose the best strategies, taking into account ideas about other participants, their resources and possible actions. The work of A.A. Shiyan “Game Theory: Basics and Applications in Economics and Management” about the need to master the skills and abilities to apply game theory. The work of O.Y. Baev “Selected Works on the Problems of Criminalistics and Criminal Procedure” about the fact that, from the standpoint of the categorical apparatus of game theory, the adversarial principle completely fits into the so-called antagonistic game of two players. It was analyzed the work of O.G. Yanovskaja “Effective implementation of the functions of the prosecution and defense as a condition of adversary criminal proceedings” about the strategy and tactics of advocacy from the perspective of using the concept of solving game theory. It was analyzed the work of Y.A. Tsvetkov “The game of justice: How to increase the gain?” which examines the practical application of game theory in criminal proceedings using the Nash matrix and algorithms for making optimal decisions. It is concluded that the adversarial principle can be applied using ready-made mathematical models to make optimal decisions in criminal proceedings in order to achieve Nash equilibrium and, in general, increase the predictability of the outcome of criminal proceedings. Key words: game theory, criminal proceedings.
12
Lamteva, Anna V. "The Procedural Laboratory for Studying the Historical Types of Criminal Proceedings." Russian Journal of Legal Studies (Moscow) 8, no. 2 (August 12, 2021): 71–78. http://dx.doi.org/10.17816/rjls70289.
Full textAbstract:
The article is devoted to the study of historical types of criminal proceedings in a vertical direction. The foremost archetypes of criminal procedure, which laid the technological and methodological foundations for formation of the investigative, adversarial, and mixed types of criminal proceedings, were analyzed. Arguments are given in favor of the fact that the initial reference point for criminal proceedings is the accusatory-adversarial type. The appropriate legal examples from the legislation of Athens and Ancient Rome are referenced in the article. An attempt is made to prove three hypotheses about the modern types of criminal procedure, the sequential system about the models of criminal procedure. Consideration is given to the archetype. The debatable issue regarding the active and passive positions of judges in the resolution of criminal cases on their merits was considered. The author's position in favor of the role of a judge as a non-initiative arbitrator between the parties was appropriate and justified only in the times of the rise of Athens and Ancient Rome. The judicial compositions of each case consisted of several hundred judges, which made it possible to make the right decision. The judges themselves were from the people. In particular, this is why, before our era, there were no dubious statistics in court proceedings from the point of view of the adversarial principle. It further explains why there were both convictions and acquittals in sufficient numbers for a democratic state. The modern procedural role of a judge is often reduced to the personal neutral, but at the same time active investigation of the evidence is presented by the parties. Much attention is given to the modern type of criminal process, which is called mixed. This content is considered in two ways as a symbiosis of investigative and adversarial types and also as a procedural duet of accusatory-adversarial and techno-centric models.
13
Reshetnikova, Irina. "150 years of Adversarial Civil Proceedings in Russia." Russian Law Journal 1, no. 1 (February 17, 2015): 39. http://dx.doi.org/10.17589/2309-8678-2013-1-1-39-45.
Full text
14
Rohatiuk, Ihor. "Basic principles of the prosecutor in criminal proceedings under Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine." Internal Security 8, no. 1 (January 30, 2016): 111–22. http://dx.doi.org/10.5604/20805268.1231545.
Full textAbstract:
Principles have always been the cornerstones of criminal proceedings’ legal regulation affecting all participants of criminal process. Taking into account the accelerated pace of current law enforcement reforming it is necessary to mention the prosecution institute and key role of criminal proceedings’ principles presenting scientific background for further empirical findings. The majority of these principles defines the priority growth directions of criminal process as well as creates friendly environment for behavioral aspects of criminal proceeding parties. This article provides comparative analysis of the existing criminal procedural principles of the prosecutor’s role in the criminal proceedings with specification of the legality principle as a requirement for all subjects of the criminal proceedings, including the prosecutor, to use the norms and provisions of legal acts correctly, to comply it consistently and perform accurately, explores the historical origins of these principles and their determinants’ origin starting from the times of Kievan Rus and its unique judicial system and proves that the adversarial principle is closely connected with dispositivity of prosecutor’s participation in criminal proceeding. An emphasis is placed on correlation between the ‘principles’ and ‘foundations’ terms examined by Ukrainian and Soviet scholars and its application in relation to the newly adopted Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine.
15
Shepitko, V. Y. "ADVERSARIAL MODEL OF PRE-TRIAL INVESTIGATION: ILLUSIONS AND REALITY." Theory and Practice of Forensic Science and Criminalistics 15 (November 30, 2016): 5–13. http://dx.doi.org/10.32353/khrife.2015.01.
Full textAbstract:
The article analyzes certain trends in the mechanism of the adversarial process at the pre-trial investigation stage. It attempts to determine legislative changes in the regulation of the pre-trial investigation as a stage in criminal proceedings. The article also focuses on the essence of the investigation activity, the order of its implementation, the investigator’s functions and powers. At the same time any investigation has to ultimately aim at establishing the truth. The article determines the functional purposes of investigation (search) actions as well as secret investigation (search) actions and points out to certain problems and deficiencies in the course of their implementation. It dwells on the peculiarities of addressing special knowledge by various parties of the criminal proceedings (the state prosecution and the defense). The article concludes that at present the parties to the criminal trial proceedings do not have equal access to special knowledge. With this regard and taking into account the existing conditions, the article offers suggestions to optimize the investigation activity with the emphasis on the need for making criminalistic knowledge available to the pre-trial investigation and formation of an «adversarial criminalistics».
16
Stolitnii, Anton. "The Adversarial System in the Criminal Process of Ukraine: Technical and Legal Aspects." Russian Law Journal 7, no. 1 (March 22, 2019): 154–77. http://dx.doi.org/10.17589/2309-8678-2019-7-1-154-177.
Full textAbstract:
This article substantiates the author’s scientific concept of electronic criminal proceedings, as regards the use thereof in the adversarial system, which would involve the formation of criminal proceedings as an electronic file, and the procedural interaction of the subjects of proceedings in an electronic law enforcement environment. The tasks of this article are as follows: analysis of issues that may arise when establishing such adversarial system in the criminal process of Ukraine; study of foreign experience of involving a defense lawyer in electronic criminal procedural processes; and development of proposals for improving the domestic practice of law enforcement.The Uniform Register of Pre-trial Investigations (URPI) has been defined as an electronic procedural document and an integral segment of criminal proceedings. The analysis of the electronic segment of the pre-trial investigation shows that the lawyer’s procedural status needs to be improved by his/her involvement in the URPI. Based on the analysis of the experience of electronic criminal proceedings in the province of Alberta (Canada), the Czech Republic, Sweden, and Kazakhstan, proposals have been drawn up to bring the defense to the URPI.As a result of the study, the author identified the legal and technical aspects of involving an attorney in electronic criminal proceedings, which suggested successive practical steps in creating personal virtual accounts, an algorithm for involving a defense lawyer in proceedings, and reforming the Uniform Register of Lawyers of Ukraine (URLU) as an electronic procedural legalization instrument.
17
Muratov, K. D. "SIGNIFICANCE OF THE ADVERSARIAL USE OF MATERIAL EVIDENCE IN CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS." Bulletin of Udmurt University. Series Economics and Law 31, no. 4 (August 12, 2021): 674–80. http://dx.doi.org/10.35634/2412-9593-2021-31-4-674-680.
Full textAbstract:
The idea of adversariality in criminal proceedings, carried away by its simplicity and originality in the context of public legal relations, after a certain period of time had passed the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation, gradually began to be reasonably questioned. The study of procedural procedures, the recognition of objects and documents as material evidence, as well as the subjects of the collection and presentation of material evidence, allow a closer look at the legal relationship and powers of the parties in criminal proceedings in the field of their implementation both in pre-trial and in court proceedings. Investigative and judicial processes as historically established forms of criminal procedure should be adversarial. The author examines the importance of the adversarial nature of the parties in the formation of material evidence in criminal cases and their assessment by the parties when substantiating the conclusions in the case, shows their theoretical and legal significance, procedural and legal, preventive and prophylactic and informational and evidentiary value.
18
Coscas-Williams, Béatrice, and Michal Alberstein. "A Patchwork of Doors." New Criminal Law Review 22, no. 4 (2019): 585–617. http://dx.doi.org/10.1525/nclr.2019.22.4.585.
Full textAbstract:
Our paper surveys the development of criminal hybrid models in two continental jurisdictions, Italy and France, following the 1987 Recommendation of the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe to accelerate criminal proceedings through the introduction of guilty pleas, out-of-court settlements and simplified proceedings. We describe various frameworks for criminal justice as a multi-door arena, of which the plea bargaining is but one of several possibilities. In our review, we emphasize consensual elements, the place of the search of truth, and the role of the judges and other stakeholders. We outline the different paths that France and Italy have taken as incorporating adversarial and inquisitorial elements to increase efficiency. The French system made gradual modifications and remained inquisitorial by nature. Aside from the more recent integration of proceedings without trial inspired by plea bargaining, it has developed doors of abbreviated trials where the investigation stage is minimized. This has resulted in a different version of the vanishing trial—the vanishing investigation. The Italian system, on the other hand, has announced a drastic transformation to an adversarial framework of trial, while adopting mainly proceedings without trial. This shift has not resulted in a vanishing trial phenomenon, and currently, the full adversarial-type trial remains the main door in Italy. We describe the sequence of transformations of these systems and emphasize the significance of this contemporary patchwork of doors in terms of the role of the judges and the possibility of implementing a conflict resolution criminal justice perspective.
19
Quinn, Katie. "Justice for Vulnerable and Intimidated Witnesses in Adversarial Proceedings?" Modern Law Review 66, no. 1 (January 2003): 139–55. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1468-2230.6601008.
Full text
20
Koryakovtsev, Vyacheslav V., and Xenia V. Pitulko. "Adversarial process: urgent problems of modern Russian criminal proceedings." Law Enforcement Review 3, no. 1 (April 26, 2019): 119–37. http://dx.doi.org/10.24147/2542-1514.2019.3(1).119-137.
Full text
21
Marrero, Danny. "An Epistemological Theory of Argumentation for Adversarial Legal Proceedings." Informal Logic 36, no. 3 (September 15, 2016): 288. http://dx.doi.org/10.22329/il.v36i3.4720.
Full textAbstract:
The rhetorical view (R) suggests that the goal of factual ar- gumentation in legal proceedings is to persuade the fact-finder about the facts under litigation. However, R does not capture our social expecta- tions: we want fact-finders to know the facts justifying their decisions, and persuasion does not necessarily lead to knowledge. I want to present an epistemic theory of argumenta- tion honoring our expectations. Un- der my account, factual argumenta- tion aims to transmit knowledge to the fact-finder.
22
Chamberlain, R. T. "Legal issues related to drug testing in the clinical laboratory." Clinical Chemistry 34, no. 3 (March 1, 1988): 633–36. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/clinchem/34.3.633.
Full textAbstract:
Abstract As has been reported many times by the lay press, urine drug testing may pose some unique challenges. The clinical laboratory interested in industrial drug testing (typically known as employee drug testing) should be aware of the many challenges that may be brought on by the fact that the result may be contested in an adversarial proceeding. This is what makes the urine drug test a forensic test. It may be one piece of evidence or the only piece of evidence used in an adversarial proceeding that may decide on punitive or rehabilitative action against an employee. As a result, unique standards for governmental contract laboratories have been proposed from the National Institute on Drug Abuse, and special proficiency testing and accreditation procedures have been promoted by professional societies. These standards illustrate the sensitive nature of the results. Because the results are subject to adversarial proceedings, all parties concerned in the testing process should be aware of the legal issues surrounding urine drug testing. There are constitutional and statutory issues as well as tort issues such as negligence, defamation, invasion of privacy, battery, infliction of emotional distress, and others. Laboratories should be especially aware of these issues, since they may be brought in as a third-party defendant to a suit or brought in as a participant in gathering the evidence. The laboratory should also be aware of other legal ramifications such as chain of custody, expert testimony, and the acceptability of scientific evidence.
23
Vinogradova, O. B. "PORTIANKINA S. P. IMPLEMENTATION OF THE ADVERSARIAL PRINCIPLE IN CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS." Scientific Notes of V. I. Vernadsky Crimean Federal University. Juridical science 6 (72), no. 2 (2020): 264–68. http://dx.doi.org/10.37279/2413-1733-2020-6-2-264-268.
Full textAbstract:
The relevance of the topic is due to the special significance of the principle of competition in the justice system of any democratic state. The purpose of the study is to analyze the application of the adversarial principle in criminal proceedings in Russia. The author concludes that the prosecution is in a deliberately advantageous position in the criminal process. For this reason it can`t be said that the principle of competitiveness is equally present at all stages of criminal proceedings.
24
Dolgov, Andrey Mikhailovich. "On the Implementation of the Captains of the Vessels of Powers of Bodies of Inquiry." Теория и практика общественного развития, no. 11 (November 6, 2020): 80–82. http://dx.doi.org/10.24158/tipor.2020.11.15.
Full textAbstract:
The paper deals with the implementation of such a principle of criminal procedure as the adversarial nature of the parties, in relation to the modern con-ditions of digitalization of legal proceedings. The relevance of this topic is explained by the fact that the current stage of development of public relations, characterized by the significant digitalization of communication links, in turn, is reflected in changes in legislation in General, and criminal proceedings in particular. At the same time, competition is one of the fundamental principles of this branch of law, the application of which should also be reflected in changes in legislation. In the course of the work, the criminal procedure norms regulating these issues, statistical data on the work of courts of General ju-risdiction, opinions and positions of leading proce-dural scientists in Russia and foreign countries (the Republic of Kazakhstan, Germany) were examined. As a result of the conducted research, the conclu-sion is made about the impact of the development of digitalization of criminal proceedings on the prac-tical application of the principle of adversarial par-ties.
25
Roclawska, Monika, and Adam Bulat. "Towards an American Model of Criminal Process: The Reform of the Polish Code of Criminal Procedure." Baltic Journal of Law & Politics 7, no. 1 (June 1, 2014): 1–11. http://dx.doi.org/10.2478/bjlp-2014-0001.
Full textAbstract:
Abstract In September 2013, the Polish Parliament passed an amendment to the Code of Criminal Procedure. The legislators decided to expand a number of adversarial elements present in current Polish criminal proceedings. When these changes come into effect (July 1, 2015), Polish criminal procedure will be similar to American regulations, in which the judge’s role is to be an impartial arbitrator, not an investigator. The authors of the article describe the meaning of the principle of adversarial trial in Poland. They also emphasized relations between this principle and the concept of “material truth”. The changes established by the amendment are shown in perspective of the American definition of adversarial trial. The authors analyze the reform and attempt to predict the problems with new regulations in practice.
26
Kachalova, Oksana V., and Maksim V. Belyaev. "ON THE ACTIVITY OF THE COURT IN ADVERSARIAL CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS." Ugolovnaya yustitsiya, no. 11 (June 1, 2018): 57–60. http://dx.doi.org/10.17223/23088451/11/11.
Full text
27
Taraban, Nikolay A. "On the Status of the Adversarial Principle in Constitutional Proceedings." State power and local self-government 7 (July 2, 2020): 13–17. http://dx.doi.org/10.18572/1813-1247-2020-7-13-17.
Full text
28
Campbell, Terence W. "The Validity of the Psychopathy Checklist-Revised in Adversarial Proceedings." Journal of Forensic Psychology Practice 6, no. 4 (December 8, 2006): 43–53. http://dx.doi.org/10.1300/j158v06n04_03.
Full text
29
Akimova, Tatyana Ivanovna. "Adversarial proceedings, equality of parties to administrative proceedings and the active role of the court." Current Issues of the State and Law 2, no. 6 (2018): 79–86. http://dx.doi.org/10.20310/2587-9340-2018-2-6-79-86.
Full text
30
Popova, Irina P. "Separate Grounds for the Obligatory Involvement of a Defense Counsel in a Criminal Case as a Procedural Safeguard." Advocate’s practice 1 (January 14, 2021): 24–28. http://dx.doi.org/10.18572/1999-4826-2021-1-24-28.
Full textAbstract:
Despite the desire of the domestic legislator to get away from the elements of the accusatory bias in criminal proceedings, at the pre-trial stages the rights and possibilities of the prosecution are much wider than the defense. That is why the participation of the defense attorney in the pre-trial stages of the criminal proceedings is becoming more relevant and serves as a procedural guarantee both to ensure the adversarial process of the parties and to ensure the suspect (accused) the right to defense. The grounds for the mandatory participation of a defense counsel may also arise in judicial stages, where the principle of adversarial process of the parties should be ensured by providing equal procedural opportunities to the parties. The normative consolidation of the grounds for the mandatory participation of a defender is not entirely flawless, in connection with which, the author considers some of them through the prism of providing appropriate procedural guarantees to the person against whom criminal prosecution is carried out. As a result of the study of the grounds specified in paragraph 3.1, 5–8 part 1 of Art. 51 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation, the author came to the conclusion that it is necessary to ensure the mandatory participation of counsel in pre-trial proceedings, as well as in the absence of the accused (defendant) in court proceedings.
31
Rostovtsev, A. V. "Special Knowledge in the Work of a Defense Lawyer." Theory and Practice of Forensic Science 12, no. 1 (March 30, 2017): 27–29. http://dx.doi.org/10.30764/1819-2785-2017-12-1-27-29.
Full textAbstract:
Adversariality of the parties of prosecution and defense in criminal proceedings offers the defense lawyer an opportunity to apply their special knowledge. The article presents the author's view of the problem of the use of special knowledge by the defense lawyer in the context of an adversarial criminal trial.
32
Jolowicz, JA. "Adversarial and Inquisitorial Models of Civil Procedure." International and Comparative Law Quarterly 52, no. 2 (April 2003): 281–95. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/iclq/52.2.281.
Full textAbstract:
There is a widespread belief in this country that while England and the other common law countries have an adversarial system of civil procedure, continental countries use the inquisitorial system. The fact is, however, that the only kind of situation in which a truly inquisitorial procedure can be envisaged is exemplified when a policeman who, arriving at the scene of a fracas, opens the proceedings with the time honoured formula, ‘What's going on here?’ Short of that, there is nothing to which an inquisitorial judge can direct his inquiry unless and until a complaint of some kind is addressed to him. Even writers on French administrative law, whose procedure is claimed to be inquisitorial, find it difficult to avoid language that might be thought more appropriate to an adversary system. So for example, it is said that notice of the complaint must be given to all those whom the claimant indicates as his opponents.
33
Shinkaretskaya, Galina Georgievna. "Proof in international court proceedings: articulation of the problem." Международное право, no. 4 (April 2020): 60–71. http://dx.doi.org/10.25136/2644-5514.2020.4.32613.
Full textAbstract:
One of the important elements of international court proceedings is the acquisition of information materials upon which the court makes its decisions. Such information, same as in the context of domestic courts, is called judicial evidence. The constituent documents of international courts contain very meager regulation of acquisition and evaluation of the evidence. The parties to international legal proceeding are the sovereign states, which makes it primarily adversarial. This implies that the parties represent the facts that confirm their positions. However, international courts rely on the principle of jura novit curia (“the court knows the law”), i.e. the parties to legal dispute do not need to plead or prove the law that applies to their case. This problem gains special importance due to the growing number and variety of international courts, as well as the emergence of a number of quasi-judicial institutions; in this sphere, all of them rely on the jurisprudence of the International Court of Justice. Certain new trends are traced in the practice of courts and even categories of cases that pertain to human rights.
34
Kirchengast, Tyrone. "Victim Lawyers, Victim Advocates, and the Adversarial Criminal Trial." New Criminal Law Review 16, no. 4 (2013): 568–94. http://dx.doi.org/10.1525/nclr.2013.16.4.568.
Full textAbstract:
Adversarial proceedings in common law jurisdictions tend to exclude the victim of crime. Although victim impact statements provide some role for victims following conviction but before sentencing, such statements may not influence the actual sentencing outcome, despite allowing for a therapeutic experience that may encourage the restoration of the victim. The introduction of victim lawyers across certain common law jurisdictions, including England and Wales, the United States and Australia, allows victims to retain private counsel to represent their interests alongside those of the state, from pretrial hearings and potentially through to appeal. By comparison, various civil law jurisdictions following an adversarial trial process, including Sweden, have long allowed such representation. This article provides a comparative assessment of the rise of victim lawyers in common law jurisdictions, arguing that access to private counsel is an important development in criminal justice that allows for the expression of the agency of the victim as a significant stakeholder in adversarial systems of justice.
35
Jahn, Matthias, and Charlotte Schmitt-Leonardy. "The German “Verständigung” and Consensual Elements in German Criminal Trials." German Law Journal 21, no. 6 (September 2020): 1134–48. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/glj.2020.69.
Full textAbstract:
AbstractNegotiated agreements in criminal proceedings have often been regarded as the embodiment of a negative wider trend towards the informalization of the criminal procedure, and have—especially in Germany—long been the subject of vivid controversies. A criminal proceeding in the traditional sense aims to establish the truth ex officio, which is achieved by means of a comprehensive inquiry into the facts conducted by the court during the trial, followed by a sentence that appropriately reflects the individual guilt of the defendant, which can then, in turn, achieve the procedural objective of “justice.” A streamlining of the extensive inquiry into the facts that the court would normally have to conduct via the consensual process of negotiation does not, a priori, fit the mold of a criminal procedure in the aforementioned sense. At the same time, the consensual termination of criminal proceedings—which also includes other forms of termination of the proceeding besides the concept of Verständigung, which occur by means of a preferment of public charges—is, in fact, more prevalent in practice these days than judgments rendered in adversarial trials are. Our Article focuses on the reasons why this stark contrast between legal doctrine and reality came to pass and which aspects of the implementation of the concept of consensus into the German law of criminal procedure still seem problematic.
36
Gladysheva, O. V. "MODERN IDEA ON ADVERSARIAL PRE-TRIAL PROCEEDINGS AND PROBLEMS OF ITS ENSURING." Juridical Journal of Samara University 5, no. 4 (December 15, 2019): 74. http://dx.doi.org/10.18287/2542-047x-2019-5-4-74-80.
Full text
37
Pechnikov, Gennady, Vladimir Shinkaruk, and Natalia Solovyova. "Is Formal Legal and Objective (Material) Truth Reconcilable in the CCP RF?" Logos et Praxis, no. 4 (February 2019): 61–66. http://dx.doi.org/10.15688/lp.jvolsu.2018.4.7.
Full textAbstract:
The article critically evaluates the point of view on the coexistence of formally legal truth and objective (material) truth in today's Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, it also criticizes the position that there are no criteria that clearly distinguishing these truths and that the philosophical approach should not be disseminated on the criminal process, which should be taken autonomously from philosophy. The article defends the point of view that in the present Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation competition is selfsufficient and excludes objective truth. Adversarial criminal process is characterized by formal legal truth, and objective truth requires a fundamentally different type (model) of criminal proceedings - an objectively true criminal process. The authors consider this model of criminal proceedings to be a higher, more perfect and fair type of criminal proceedings, in contrast to the adversarial (winning-losing) type of criminal process, in which the "right and fairness of the strong" prevails.The authors of the article firmly stand on the philosophy of the materialist dialectic; they believe that a philosophical approach is also necessary in the criminal process. In this regard, there are dialectical and non-dialectical (not taking into account the objective laws and rules of dialectics) criminal processes. Relativism of the adversary criminal process, its susceptibility to sophistry are obvious. Therefore, in a competitive duel of the parties, it is important to be more convincing in your arguments than your procedural opponent. We see an objectively-true model of the criminal process as a higher, more perfect and more equitable type of criminal proceedings. The intention of truth and the belief in the ability to prove it give a moral meaning to cognitive activity, whereas indifference to it was perceived throughout the history of culture as a threat to the moral existence of society.
38
Nuriyev, G. H. "The powers of the European Constitutional Courts to hear cases on the constitutionality of regulations at the request of the courts and their corresponding features of manufacture." Russian Journal of Legal Studies 2, no. 3 (September 15, 2015): 110–14. http://dx.doi.org/10.17816/rjls18054.
Full textAbstract:
The article analyzes the powers of the constitutional courts of four leading European countries: Germany, France, Italy and Spain to consider cases on the constitutionality of regulations at the request of the courts, as well as the corresponding features of the production. Reveals the nature of this type of constitutional proceedings. It is proved that the adversarial principle is applied only partially, and in some cases does not apply.
39
Kuzmenko, O. V., and P. R. Levchuk. "Implementation of the principle of competitiveness of the parties and free- dom in the presentation of their evidence to the court in the criminal process of some countries of the world." Uzhhorod National University Herald. Series: Law, no. 64 (August 14, 2021): 313–16. http://dx.doi.org/10.24144/2307-3322.2021.64.57.
Full textAbstract:
One of the tasks of criminal proceedings is to protect the individual, society and the state from criminal offenses, which is achieved through the implementation of other tasks, in particular, by ensuring a rapid, complete and im-partial investigation and trial. In this case, any procedural decisions in criminal proceedings must be based on evi-dence that serves as a kind of link between the event of a criminal offense and the consciousness of the investigator, prosecutor, investigating judge, court. Evidence itself is the main content of criminal procedure in both the pre-trial investigation and in the judicial stages of criminal proceedings in most countries.The authors note that the Constitution of Ukraine as one of the main principles of justice provides for adversarial parties and freedom in providing the court with their evidence and proving their persuasiveness before the court. Factor The Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine has significantly expanded the scope of this principle of the do-mestic criminal process, including in the field of evidence. Thus, the defense, as well as the prosecution, was given the opportunity to collect evidence during the pre-trial investigation, as a result of which the right of the parties and other participants in criminal proceedings to submit evidence (things and documents) is becoming increasingly important.The article also examines that the principles of criminal procedure in France include: the principle of formality, prosecution, legality, equality, dignity, protection of the victim, urgency of the trial, presumption of innocence, publicity, oral and adversarial proceedings. And the main principles of the criminal process in Germany include: the principle of formality (publicity); the principle of charge; the principle of legality and the principle of compulsory research. A characteristic feature of modern law in the field of criminal procedure in the United States is the consis-tent expansion of the institution of delegated legislation. The US Congress has delegated to the Supreme Court the right to establish rules of criminal procedure that have the force of federal law.
40
Pochylá, Veronika. "Previous witness testimony as immediate or urgent action and its admissibility in court." International and Comparative Law Review 15, no. 2 (December 1, 2015): 145–59. http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/iclr-2016-0041.
Full textAbstract:
Abstract The paper deals with the admissibility of witness testimony in the preliminary proceeding which could be read in court without right of the defence to hear or examine such a witness. This question is particularly interesting with regard to preserving the adversarial principle which is important for an objective assessment of the facts. The focus will be to answer the question of whether so obtained and executed evidence may stand as the main evidence of guilt especially with regard to Article 6,par. 1 and 3 (d) ECHR (right to obtain attendance and examination of witnesses). The arguments in this paper will be submitted supported by the case law of the Constitutional Court of the Czech Republic and the ECtHR. Contribution will also deal with British law and the applicability of the so-called Hearsay rule and the exceptions to this rule which can be applied in criminal proceedings.
41
Waye, Vicki, and Ping Xiong. "The Relationship between Mediation and Judicial Proceedings in China." Asian Journal of Comparative Law 6 (2011): 1–34. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s2194607800000466.
Full textAbstract:
AbstractAfter a period of decline, judicial mediation has been recently revived in China. The revival has occurred as a result of a combination of political and juridical forces. China's courts have been struggling to meet demand for access to justice and the revival of judicial mediation is part of a broader policy to promote mediation as a mainstream dispute resolution mechanism. At the same time, the revival of judicial mediation also reflects the disaffection of China's political elite with an emphasis upon adversarial, western style legal process. China's establishment appears to be seeking a more responsive multi-door style of court system. This article traces recent developments in China which track the rise, fall and rise of judicial mediation.
42
Mashinnikova, N. O. "DEBATABLE ISSUES OF ABUSE OF RIGHTS WHEN THE COURT IMPLEMENTS ITS DISCRETIONARY POWERS." Bulletin of Udmurt University. Series Economics and Law 29, no. 4 (July 25, 2019): 514–21. http://dx.doi.org/10.35634/2412-9593-2019-29-4-514-521.
Full textAbstract:
In this article the author examines the general theoretical problems associated with the abuse of the right of a judge in the exercise of his discretionary powers in the framework of justice. The author considers the category of “abuse” through the categories of “good faith”, “interest” and “impartiality”. The author substantiates the claim that the judge's interest in the case does not imply his lack of impartiality. The article states that a significant change in the direction of criminal proceedings from national values to the recognition of the individual, his rights to individuality and self-realization has led to the development of procedural contradictions caused by the collision of the traditions of domestic criminal proceedings with innovations borrowed from the Anglo-Saxon adversarial process. In order to determine the optimal ratio of judicial discretion and its limits in criminal proceedings, as well as to prevent abuse by the court, the author has developed proposals to consolidate the principle of good faith of participants in criminal proceedings and the definition of abuse in the exercise of court rights.
43
Murrie, Daniel C., and Kenneth Balusek. "Forensic Assessment of Violence Risk in Adversarial Proceedings: Pursuing Objectivity and Avoiding Bias." Journal of Forensic Psychology Practice 7, no. 4 (January 8, 2008): 141–53. http://dx.doi.org/10.1300/j158v07n04_06.
Full text
44
Zernov, Stanislav I. "On Review of an Expert’s Report on Action Proceedings in the Civil and Commercial Procedure." Arbitrazh-civil procedure 1 (January 14, 2021): 29–35. http://dx.doi.org/10.18572/1812-383x-2021-1-29-35.
Full textAbstract:
On claim proceedings, as a rule, an judicial expert's opinion is required to establish the objective side of the dispute. Assessing the credibility of the expert's report for the court is difficult, because it requires the use of special expert knowledge. Legal issues of preparation of the critical review (another expert's opinion) on the judicial expert' report, as a way to implement the adversarial principle of parties, are discussed. Provides guidance on the interaction between counsel and expert in the case of challenging the judicial expert's opinion.
45
Patrusheva, A. A. "EGAL RELATIONS RELATED TO THE DEATH OF A WITNESS IN CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS." Scientific Notes of V. I. Vernadsky Crimean Federal University. Juridical science 6 (72), no. 2 (2020): 283–91. http://dx.doi.org/10.37279/2413-1733-2020-6-2-283-291.
Full textAbstract:
The legal fact of the death of a witness in a criminal trial causes various legal consequences to occur. In cases where the witness, after being called to give evidence, was not questioned in connection with the death, these consequences are expressed in changing the methods and means of proof in the criminal case. In situations where the death of a witness occurred after interrogation, criminal procedural consequences may occur in the form of the reading of the deceased’s testimony, the evidentiary value of which is not lost if certain procedural conditions are met. Then the death of a witness acquires the property of an exclusive basis for limiting the oral proceedings and the adversarial nature of the parties in criminal proceedings, allowing the court to unconditionally resort to reading the testimony of the deceased.
46
Nasonov, A. A. "CRIMINAL PROCEDURE FUNCTIONS AND POWERS OF THE PROSECUTOR AS FACTORS DETERMINING THE SPECIFICS OF PROSECUTOR's SUPERVISION IN PRE-TRIAL PROCEEDINGS." Bulletin of Udmurt University. Series Economics and Law 31, no. 1 (February 12, 2021): 124–32. http://dx.doi.org/10.35634/2412-9593-2021-31-1-124-132.
Full textAbstract:
The article analyzes the opinions of scientists expressed during the scientific discussion that unfolded around the issue of criminal procedure functions of the Prosecutor in pre-trial proceedings. Provides additional arguments in favor of supervision of execution of laws as the main function of the Prosecutor under the Law on the Prosecutor determines other types of prosecutorial activities (criminal prosecution, the preliminary investigation, etc.) that are supportive in nature. These types of Prosecutor's activities are not only ways to specify Prosecutor's supervision in criminal proceedings, but also means of implementing the criminal procedure function of the prosecution, which exists according to the concept of the current criminal procedure legislation of the Russian Federation, focused on the adversarial process, along with the function of protection and the function of resolving criminal cases. The article also addresses the issue of granting additional powers to the Prosecutor in pre-trial proceedings. It is proved that the decision to grant additional powers to the Prosecutor in pre-trial proceedings should create opportunities to maintain the necessary balance in pre-trial proceedings between Prosecutor's supervision, departmental control and judicial control. Evidence is given that the harmonious existence of Prosecutor's supervision and departmental control in pre-trial proceedings will allow us to count on overcoming existing violations of the law in the investigation of crimes, which currently remain many.
47
Nakane, Ikuko. "“Is it the case that … ?”: Building toward findings of fact in Japanese criminal trials." Semiotica 2017, no. 216 (May 24, 2017): 423–50. http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/sem-2015-0078.
Full textAbstract:
AbstractThis article explores the adversarial nature of Japanese criminal court proceedings by analyzing functions of the questions with X to iu koto ga arimasu ka? (‘Is it the case that X took place?’), based on courtroom discourse data and trial manuals for legal professionals. To discuss the roles of lawyers’ questions with the projection with the frame “Is it the case that … ?” in witness examination, the projection’s ideational, textual and interpersonal functions are analyzed drawing on Halliday’s systemic functional approach to discourse. By analyzing sequential roles of the projection, the article highlights the ways in which it serves as a story-construction device, as well as a signpost marker towards exposing inconsistency in witness’s testimony. The analysis also reveals that the dual ideational meanings of the projection – one everyday and the other technical – may leave lay participants unaware of its legal purposes, thus creating a potentially problematic lay-professional communication gap. The discussion of the interpersonal aspect suggests the projection’s role to neutralize coercive force of leading questions as well as to index an identity of legal authority. The paper concludes that while projection “Is it the case … ?” seems to symbolize the adversarial nature of Japanese criminal trials, its neutralizing effect and arbitrariness in use also imply the pseudo-adversarial and hybrid orientation.
48
Jackson, John D., and Sean Doran. "Addressing the Adversarial Deficit in Non-Jury Criminal Trials." Israel Law Review 31, no. 1-3 (1997): 645–89. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0021223700015430.
Full textAbstract:
It is a curious quirk of legal scholarship that so much attention has been devoted to the rules and procedures that operate injury trials and so little to the way in which these rules and procedures operate in the vast majority of trials which are conducted without a jury. This “jury-centredness” as it has been called was noted almost thirty years ago by the American scholar Kenneth Culp Davis when he urged scholars and the legal profession to escape from the deep-seated habit of allowing all thinking about evidence law to be dominated by the needs of the 3% of trials that involve juries and to think instead about the needs of the remaining 97% of trials that are tried without a jury. It is certainly true that the withdrawal of the jury from many categories of cases throughout this century in many jurisdictions has not been accompanied by any instant changes in the law of evidence. Certain commentators have noted that in spite of Thayer's claim that the rules are the “child of the jury”, the rules of evidence have proved remarkably resilient in outlasting the demise of the jury. The parent may have ceased to exist in many legal proceedings but the child has lived on.
49
Gray, Anthony. "The Right to Confrontation in Common Law Systems." New Criminal Law Review 18, no. 1 (2015): 129–65. http://dx.doi.org/10.1525/nclr.2015.18.1.129.
Full textAbstract:
Recent years have seen a departure from traditional criminal due process requirements in the wake of 9/11, one feature of which has been the increased use of closed court hearings in relation to the introduction of evidence considered particularly sensitive to national security. Typically, both the person affected by the proceedings and their legal adviser are excluded from such a hearing. These developments contradict long-established and fundamental characteristics of proceedings in a criminal law trial in common law systems, such as the open court principle and the adversarial nature of proceedings. They also contradict the right to confront accusers, a right traceable to Roman times, and a feature of the British system for more than four centuries, and of the American system for more than two. This article highlights the latest case law developments in key jurisdictions around the world before critically appraising trends evident in the recent jurisprudence. It is critical of the fact that courts in some jurisdictions have permitted substantial departures from the right of an individual to confront witnesses being used against them.
50
Pushkarev, Viktor Victorovich, Ekaterina Alekseevna Trishkina, Ekaterina Viktorovna Tokareva, Bui Tran Cuong, and Olga Rinatovna Shepeleva. "The Adversarial Approach in the Pre-trial Phase of Prosecution." Cuestiones Políticas 37, no. 65 (August 6, 2020): 281–87. http://dx.doi.org/10.46398/cuestpol.3865.21.
Full textAbstract:
The confrontational or adversarial approach is one of the main factors that forms the basis of the criminal justice system. However, its application in the pre-trial phase is limited. Therefore, this document aims to demonstrate the importance of analyzing theoretical and practical problems. The choice of documentary and casuistic methodology allowed the following conclusions to be reached: Currently, the Russian police are undergoing changes that aim to humanize the criminal process, to solve fundamental challenges in the protection of the rights, liberty and interests of a person in the pre-trial investigation that will guarantee the confrontation system in criminal proceedings. We conducted a comparative legal investigation and analyzed criminal case files, as well as the results of questionnaire surveys conducted among investigators and attorneys. Overall, the results represent the actual state of cases in the pre-trial phase and help determine areas of development. We propose feasible changes to the criminal procedure legislation of the Russian Federation that will eliminate the disparity between some of its regulations and the requirements of the confrontation system in general.