A comparative study of the Drawback of Adversarial Criminal Legal system: Problems & Recommendations

ABSTRACT

In this sub-section the advantages and disadvantages of the adversarial system are investigated with reference to the most well-known (and closely affiliated) alternative, the (so-called) inquisitorial system prevalent in continental Europe, and in a large number of other nations, including some in our region.

Although the adversarial system is contrasted with the inquisitorial system, the latter in fact also enshrines in law the right of the accused to oppose the evidence of the prosecution and introduce evidence to prove innocence; it is thus ‘contradictoire’ (to use the French term) or adversarial in that sense. It is rather the structure and organisation of the forensic process or investigative method, than the adversarial nature of proceedings, that distinguishes the two systems.¹ In an adversarial system, the parties, acting independently and in a partisan fashion, are responsible for uncovering and presenting evidence before a passive and neutral trial judge or jury. In an inquisitorial system, the ultimate responsibility for finding the truth lies with an official body that acts with judicial authority, and gathers evidence both for and against the accused. Whereas the actors in an adversarial system are equal and opposing parties, in an inquisitorial system the accused is thus not a party to proceedings to the same extent.

TABLE OF CONTENT

DESCRIPTIONS	Page No.
1. Introduction	01
2. Definitions	04
3. Defects of Different Acts	08
4. Defects of Trial	28
5. Defects of International Ordinance	31
6. Problems or Obstacle to the Adversarial criminal justice system of Bangladesh	36
7. Suggestions	41
8. Conclusion	44
Bibliography	46-48