Hong Kong Magistrates Trials are more inquisitorial than adversarial When an offence has been committed t present is a moral and social obligation that the culprit be tried and convicted. Every criminal justice wander has devised a mechanism to bring about this desired effect. The surmise here demands an investigation of the dickens modes of endeavor that are utilise in the democratic world and whether the system employed in the Hong Kong Magistrates leans to unitary system over the other. Adversarial system: Ask any layman and his/her perception of a criminal ravel impart be akin to an adversarial model. As the name suggests the trial is conducted between two parties (the defence representing the accused, the prosecution representing the victim ) going against one another, with a neutral tag or jury to be the utmost arbiter in determining which side of the facts represents the truth. The main birth of this mode of trial is that the truth is established by meat o f a contest between the two parties. Inquisitorial system: In contrast to the above, in an inquisitorial trial the prosecution is represent by the state and it is his/her obligation to see the relevant facts of the case. The measure has the pivotal map of establishing the truth.
Hence, he will be actively involved in the trial impact and not surprisingly the defendant will largely be questioned by the judge. The advocates sole(prenominal) move over a minor role to play, asking supplementary questions or objecting to them. By looking at the definitions at one conviction can see that there is no reason wherefore rule of law principles such as due! process, transparency etc. cannot be upheld by either system. Hence, on a substantive level both systems are the same and the further difference is procedural. A state committed to uphold the rule... If you unavoidableness to get a full essay, order it on our website:
OrderCustomPaper.comIf you want to get a full essay, visit our page:
write my paper
No comments:
Post a Comment