Analysis & Critique of Canadian Court System - Essay Example

These models are the inquisitorial and the adversary models. The Canadian Court System mostly applies the adversarial process in its legal processes. Adversarial justice system is the best approach to addressing justice and equality in court systems and the Canadian Courts should continue using it. Reasons for the Adversary Justice System The ultimate concern of the adversary court system is to ensure equal treatment between the prosecution and defense. The court assumes a neutral position and acts as referee between the two parties.

This system requires all parties to adhere to the law in responding to different issues in the court. For instance, police officers must use the procedures that the law accepts to obtain evidence from suspects or the accused. The court will determine whether the police used the appropriate ways of gathering evidence that are recognized by the law and are free from deception and other malpractices. The neutral state of the court ensures a fair trial for the accused (see Law Commission). Adversary system stresses on strict observance of the law in seeking justice for all parties involved in a case.

This characteristic gives the system an added advantage over the inquisitorial justice system. Inquisitorial justice system involves the court in determining facts and evidence about a case. Therefore, the system gives room for bias where the court can favor one side of the case. This is unlike the adversary system that advocates for observance of the law in determining facts about a case. Moreover, the inquisitorial system denies the accused the right of privacy. The system requires the accused to collaborate with the police and other court officials in the process of gathering evidence.

The accused has no right of remaining silent throughout the process unlike in the adversary system where the accused has the right of choosing to remain silent throughout the court process. Courts in the adversary justice system act as supervisors of the actions of the prosecution and the accused and eliminate any practices that conflict with the law. The system does not grant the court the authority of supporting the prosecution against the accused. This form of fairness does not exist in the inquisitorial justice system.

It is possible for the authority or the police to coerce their authority on the accused in their attempt to gather evidence against him or her. The law does not allow use of evidence that is a result of coercion of authority. Police officers are known to use excessive power in their attempt to gather evidence against victims of crime. Therefore, involving the court and the police in the process is not in the best interests of ensuring equal and just treatment for offenders (see Prasad). The adversary system becomes even stronger when looking at emerging trends in the field of law.

For instance, there have been efforts to introduce the system of restorative justice in the court process. Restorative justice is an emerging trend in the court system where victims and offenders interact in the process of seeking justice. Legal procedures are not the basic requirements of punishing an offender under restorative justice. Instead, the offender must take absolute responsibility for his or her actions by convincing the victims that he or she will not repeat such an offense in the future.

The system does not recognize the state as an agent that feels the effect of law breaking. It holds the notion that actions of offenders