Adversary Procedure

(redirected from Adversarial system)
Also found in: Dictionary, Thesaurus, Legal, Wikipedia.

Adversary Procedure

 

(law), a principle of judicial procedure by virtue of which a case is essentially a contest before the court, each party defending its claims and allegations and disputing the claims and allegations of the other.

An expression of socialist democracy in the Soviet administration of justice, adversary procedure is followed in every criminal trial. The court that hears the case does not officially make the accusation. Rather, the accusation is made by an accuser, such as a procurator, civic prosecutor, or victim, who is also a party to the case. The defendant (the accused, under indictment) is the other party, defending himself against the accusation, personally and with the assistance of counsel. The court decides the case. Thus, the basic procedural functions are divided among the court and the parties to the case.

In part because of adversary procedure, criminal cases can be decided justly and fairly, the true facts of the case established, and the rights of all parties protected. Adversary procedure enables the court, in its investigation of the case, to hear, before passing sentence, all evidence pro and contra the accusation and to consider all the circumstances in the case, both aggravating and extenuating.

In a Soviet civil trial, adversary procedure is likewise followed. The entire trial takes the form of a contest between parties—the plaintiff and the defendant, both of whom present their case personally or with the help of counsel. Each party provides the court with evidence and explanations in support of its claims and objections; each has equal procedural rights. The court does not content itself with the materials and explanations presented; rather, it must take all steps provided for in law in order to obtain a comprehensive, full, and objective account of the real circumstances of the case and to make clear the rights and obligations of all parties.

In the law of the bourgeois states, adversary procedure is proclaimed as one of the democratic principles of the judicial process. However, complex court procedures and the de facto inequality of the parties make it difficult for the principle to be realized in practice and, in a trial, confer the advantage on the representatives of the ruling class.

M. S. STROGOVICH

Mentioned in ?
References in periodicals archive ?
'The adversarial system is a two-sided structure under which criminal trial courts operate that pits the prosecution against the defence.
Plea bargaining has changed the criminal justice system from an adversarial system into something more resembling an administrative model.
Cross-examination is a hallmark of the adversarial system. A defence lawyer, when cross-examining, aims to strengthen the defences argument and discredit the witnesses' testimony.
office of the public defender is essential to our adversarial system.
Part I explains how, under the current regime, independent juror research is antithetical, and consequently detrimental, to the integrity of trials in our adversarial system. It argues that, given the internet's ubiquity, the problem of juror research has become more pressing than ever before, and it highlights this development by reviewing a recent case and the general response of courts.
Hence, the inquisitorial method of legal practice is inherently less competitive in nature than the adversarial system, as it affords the disputing parties little opportunity to influence the evidence and proceedings to suit their own self-interest.
It seems to me that the differences between modern Australian tribunals and courts are to be found in the way governments expect us to do our work: freed of what politicians see as the constraints of the adversarial system, with greater liberty and power to cut to the heart of a matter, of whatever kind.
adversarial system. By contrast, the presence of appointed defense
It argues that the adversarial system stresses conflict resolution over finding the truth.
In theory, and many times in practice, the adversarial system facilitates the search for truth.
In the absence of external checks on judicial authority, self-applied jurisdictional limitations, effectuated through an inquisitorial procedure nested within our adversarial system, fill a crucial role.