How is the adversarial system different from the inquisitorial system?

The adversarial system relies on opposing parties presenting evidence, while the inquisitorial system is judge-driven investigation The adversarial system , used in Canada and other common law countries, operates like a structured debate where two opposing sides present their arguments before an impartial judge or jury. In contrast, the inquisitorial system , common in European countries, puts the judge in an investigative role. Key differences between the systems include: In the adversarial system, lawyers control evidence presentation and witness examination The inquisitorial system gives judges primary responsibility for gathering evidence and questioning witnesses Adversarial proceedings are more competitive and confrontational by design Inquisitorial courts focus more on fact-finding than procedural contests Canadian courts use the adversarial model but may incorporate some inquisitorial elements in specialized courts

Adversarial vs Inquisitorial System: Key Differences Explained

The adversarial system relies on opposing parties presenting evidence, while the inquisitorial system is judge-driven investigation

The adversarial system, used in Canada and other common law countries, operates like a structured debate where two opposing sides present their arguments before an impartial judge or jury. In contrast, the inquisitorial system, common in European countries, puts the judge in an investigative role.

Key differences between the systems include:

In the adversarial system, lawyers control evidence presentation and witness examination
The inquisitorial system gives judges primary responsibility for gathering evidence and questioning witnesses
Adversarial proceedings are more competitive and confrontational by design
Inquisitorial courts focus more on fact-finding than procedural contests
Canadian courts use the adversarial model but may incorporate some inquisitorial elements in specialized courts