The Adversarial System In Canada

1:

The Adversarial system of law, is a legal system used by countries that primarily follow common law. The Adversarial System, contains two advocates that represent their parties positions, usually before an impartial and unbiased group of people, known as a jury. During an Adversarial trial, both advocates attempt to call and examine witnesses to further develop a narrative for the case. After an adversarial trial ends, the jury, who has just witnessed the case and surrounding facts, must determine the truth behind the case and make a unanimous agreement.

2

A Jury is responsible for coming to a conclusion, based on the facts presented in a case,to determine if the accused is found guilty or non-guilty. During a trial the jury is responsible for taking notes on the
The Adversarial system usually consists of two opposing sides and assumes justice will result out of the debate between the two parties. Now, in the inquisitorial system of justice, the judge takes over the role of an investigator and decision maker. Trials in the inquisitorial system are often a lot short as well, as there are less lawyers, and fewer juries. This system also assumes that justice will result in extensive review of evidence. It could be argued that, the adversarial system trials could be unfair, due to one party have more resources than another(more experienced lawyers etc..). Another point that could be argued, is that the inquisitorial system gives too much power to the judge, and an impartial jury is probably better suited to determine a verdict rather than a judge. I prefer adversarial, because i believe inquisitorial, is more “guilty until proven innocent” rather than the former, along with that, it seems with the inquisitorial system, the judge is given too much power, and a impartial jury seems a lot more suited to reach a verdict, in my