Abstract
At first sight the difference between inquisitorial and adversarial legal systems appears to be a matter of form. Does this form hide substance or is it merely a matter of appearances? To answer this question one could make a list of objectives that one wants a legal procedure to serve, and next do a series of experiments to decide empirically which objectives are best served by which system. As a matter of fact, at one time this was done by John Thibaut, Laurens Walker and their co-workers (Thibaut & Walker, 1975). In a series of experiments they compared different procedures for settling legal disputes, ranging from inquisitorial to adversarial, and on the basis of these results they claimed that the adversarial procedure is superior to the inquisitorial when it comes to establish the facts of a case, and to combating external and internal bias. Moreover, when given a choice, experimental subjects invariably prefer adversarial procedures over inquisitorial ones, irrespective of what these experimental subjects were used to in their own countries.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2003 Springer Science+Business Media New York
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Crombag, H.F.M. (2003). Adversarial or Inquisitorial. In: van Koppen, P.J., Penrod, S.D. (eds) Adversarial versus Inquisitorial Justice. Perspectives in Law & Psychology, vol 17. Springer, Boston, MA. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-9196-6_2
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-9196-6_2
Publisher Name: Springer, Boston, MA
Print ISBN: 978-1-4613-4832-0
Online ISBN: 978-1-4419-9196-6
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive