7.10.2 Trial
Purpose of Trial At trial, an impartial court (a single judge, a panel, or a jury)
decides whether the accused (more appropriately called “defendant” at this stage) is
guilty of the alleged crime(s). In essence, the trial revolves around the statement of
facts and law contained in the indictment, and it must answer the following
question: is that statement true or false? If the charge described in the indictment
is deemed to be true, the defendant is found guilty and is then sentenced; if it is
found to be false, the defendant is acquitted. The decision is taken on the evidence
available, which must be carefully assessed in its probative value.
Public Trial Save for a few exceptions, the trial is public. According to modern
standards, justice must not only be done, but it must also be seen to be done. The
publicity of the trial constitutes a prevention of abuses; it is a form of social control
on the criminal process in that it induces self-restraint on the parties and
adjudicators and allows society to appreciate the correctness of the final decision.
Balance Between Parties The trial also serves as a remedy to the imbalance of
powers between the state and the individual during the investigations. During the
investigations, most of the evidence is collected in the absence of the suspect and
sometimes the suspect is even unaware that he is under inquiry. While during the
investigations the suspect has little or no opportunity to oppose the prosecution’s
thesis, at trial the accused has a possibility to properly rebut the allegations by
producing evidence and arguments in her favor. A proper defense requires that
defendants have clear knowledge of the allegations brought against them and of the
evidence on which they are grounded and that they be given an adequate chance to
discredit the prosecution’s proposition. At trial, the accused can challenge the
prosecution with equality of arms.
7.11 Adversarial or Inquisitorial?
Apart from a general skeleton, the systems of criminal justice differ from state to
state. These differences reflect the historical roots, political and socioeconomic
structures, and cultural traditions of the national states. Several attempts have been
made to classify the different systems into homogeneous groups. A popular distinc-
tion between procedural systems identifies two major models, corresponding to two
legal traditions: the adversarial or accusatorial systems and the inquisitorial or
nonadversarial systems. While the Anglo-American systems of the common law
tradition belong to the adversarial family, the civil law systems of Continental
Europe are by contrast usually labeled as inquisitorial.
The distinction between adversarial and inquisitorial systems is also discussed in
Sect.13.4.7.1.7 Criminal Law 147