Overview
Criminal procedure is the process through which the guilt or innocence of a person who is accused of a crime is established. Criminal procedure laws mainly cover what happens from the moment a crime is known to have been committed to the time all avenues of judicial process have been exhausted. However, the main focus of criminal procedure is the judicial process that relates to how criminal cases are conducted. Common law criminal procedure refers to the adversarial system that pits the prosecution against the defendant with the judge playing the role of fair arbiter (Gunn & Mevis, 2018). The Civil law criminal procedure system is also known as the inquisitorial or non-adversarial system where the judge plays an investigative role in judicial proceedings. These two systems are in use in different countries of the world and in some cases in the same countries with the proponents of each system arguing that it is better than the other.
Similarities
Whether under criminal or civil systems, criminal procedure is based on written laws that have to be rigorously followed for a person to be lawfully convicted or acquitted. The need for rigorous adherence to the law is based on the fact that unlike general judicial processes that involve property, the criminal law places the life or freedom of a defendant in peril (Gunn & Mevis, 2018). To protect human rights, criminal procedures under both the civil and common law systems are rigorously structured. The second similarity is that both systems follow the same process except in judicial proceedings. Crimes will be reported to police officers, investigated then a suspect or suspects are indicted in a court of law. The difference is mainly in what happens in court but not how cases are investigated or how suspects end up in court. Finally, upon conviction, both systems end up in a legally defined punishment for the crime and not some impromptu kind of informal punishment (Gunn & Mevis, 2018).
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Differences
The primary difference in a civil and common law criminal procedure lies in the status and obligations of the judge during trials. The judge in the common law system is a fair and balanced arbiter who superintends over the contest between the prosecution and the defense (Gunn & Mevis, 2018). The judge will normally guide the jury on the law and ensure due procedure rules are followed in court but mainly leave canvassing of issues to the two parties in a trial. Rarely will a judge make a personal inquisition on matters of fact relating to the case as the judge is mainly involved in adherence to procedure, just like a referee in a sports match. In an inquisitorial system, the judge is a major player in the trial and is involved in establishing the fact of the case so as to determine the guilt or innocence of the defendant. In mild forms of the civil system, the judge will ask questions and guide investigations on issues that are not clear. In extreme cases of the civil law system, the judge acts as an investigator and will even conduct investigations outside the courtroom (Gunn & Mevis, 2018). Therefore, in an adversarial system, guilt or innocence is determined by how the two parties argue their cases in court but in an inquisitorial system, the court will get out of its way to find the truth.
Conclusion and Reflection
With the United States being one of the most diverse nations in the world in terms of race, culture, and economic status, the most suitable criminal justice system is the one that gives all people an equal chance for accessing justice. Based on the analysis of the two systems above, the most suitable system in the USA would be the civil law system. Most cases in America are determined through plea bargaining, an option that is very appealing to poor people who stand no chance of finding justice in an adversarial system. An inquisitorial system will protect such people from being railroaded by the all-powerful criminal justice system, hence enabling them to get better access to justice (Rikken, 2018). The adversarial system favors the rich and the majorities even as it discriminates over the poor and the minorities.
References
Gunn, J., & Mevis, P. (2018). Adversarial versus inquisitorial systems of trial and investigation in criminal. Forensic Psychiatry and Psychology in Europe: A Cross-Border Study Guide , 1.
Rikken, M. (2018, March 09). Two in one: Differences in the US justice system for the rich and the poor. Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/blog/post/two-in-one-differences-in-the-us-justice-system-for-the-rich-and-the-poor
