This is the first volume that directly compares the practices of adversarial and inquisitorial systems of law from a psychological perspective. It aims at understanding why American and European continental systems differ so much, while both systems entertain much support in their communities. The book is written for advanced audiences in psychology and law.
Our adversarial legal system is used to evade the truth and makes winning the paramount goal. Here, a law veteran proposes we shift to an inquisitorial system seeking the truth, and recommends changes to evidentiary rules that confuse law enforcement and juries alike.
Robert Kagan examines the origins and consequences of the American system of "adversarial legalism". This study aims to deepen our understanding of law and its relationship to politics, and raises questions about the future of the American legal system.
Includes such presentations as: Introduction to Adversary System; Other Views of Adversary System; The Trial Judge: The Limits of Neutrality and Passivity; Place of the Jury in Adversarial Adjudication; and Lawyers: Their Usefulness, Zeal, and Candor.
This book outlines key aspects of the use of non-adversarial practices in the Australian justice system with reference to similar developments in the United States, Canada, New Zealand and the United Kingdom. It examines in detail non-adversarial theories and practices such as therapeutic jurisprudence, restorative justice, preventive law, creative problem solving, holistic law, appropriate or alternative dispute resolution, collaborative law, problem-oriented courts, diversion programs, indigenous courts, coroners courts and managerial and administrative procedures.
In recent years far more attention has been paid to victims of crime both in terms of awareness of the effect of crime upon their lives, and in changes that have been made to the criminal justice system to improve their rights and treatment. This process seems set to continue, with legislative plans announced to rebalance the criminal justice system in favour of the victim. This latest book in the Cambridge Criminal Justice Series brings together leading authorities in the field to review the role of the victim in the criminal justice system in the context of these developments.
The last twenty years have seen an unprecedented rise in the use of secret courts or ‘closed material proceedings’ largely brought about in response to the need to protect intelligence sources in the fight against terrorism. This has called into question the commitment of legal systems to long-cherished principles of adversarial justice and due process. Foremost among the measures designed to minimise the prejudice caused to parties who have been excluded from such proceedings has been the use of ‘special advocates’ who are given access to sensitive national security material and can make representations to the court on behalf of excluded parties. Special advocates are now deployed across a range of administrative, civil and criminal proceedings in many common law jurisdictions including the UK, Canada, New Zealand, Hong Kong and Australia. This book analyses the professional services special advocates offer across a range of different types of closed proceedings. Drawing on extensive interviews with special advocates and with lawyers and judges who have worked with them, the book examines the manner in which special advocates are appointed and supported, how their position differs from that of ordinary counsel within the adversarial system, and the challenges they face in the work that they do. Comparisons are made between different special advocate systems and with other models of security-cleared counsel, including that used in the United States, to consider what changes might be made to strengthen their adversarial role in closed proceedings. In making an assessment of the future of special advocacy, the book argues that there is a need to reconceptualise the unique role that special advocates play in the administration of justice.
America is a nation founded on justice and the rule of law. But our laws are too complex, and legal advice too expensive, for poor and even middle-class Americans to get help and vindicate their rights. Criminal defendants facing jail time may receive an appointed lawyer who is juggling hundreds of cases and immediately urges them to plead guilty. Civil litigants are even worse off; usually, they get no help at all navigating the maze of technical procedures and rules. The same is true of those seeking legal advice, like planning a will or negotiating an employment contract. Rebooting Justice presents a novel response to longstanding problems. The answer is to use technology and procedural innovation to simplify and change the process itself. In the civil and criminal courts where ordinary Americans appear the most, we should streamline complex procedures and assume that parties will not have a lawyer, rather than the other way around. We need a cheaper, simpler, faster justice system to control costs. We cannot untie the Gordian knot by adding more strands of rope; we need to cut it, to simplify it.
Our adversarial legal system is used to evade the truth and makes winning the paramount goal. Here, a law veteran proposes we shift to an inquisitorial system seeking the truth, and recommends changes to evidentiary rules that confuse law enforcement and juries alike.
