So we have to look at the «justice system» in a different, more comprehensive and flexible way — because the problems these people have are real and serious problems, even if
the adversarial justice process has nothing that will help solve them.
Not exact matches
I generally agree with the
adversarial process but this situation is where
justice breaks down... no public defenders for civil matters, so if you can't afford an attorney, you just get slammed?
The vast majority of people, the public, too often characterized as consumers (or prospective consumers) of legal services, don't want to be put in a position where they need to proceed with
adversarial processes to secure «
justice».
Non-Indigenous parties and lawyers, notes Nahwegahbow, are comfortable with the
adversarial design of the system, and they trust that if they have a conflict, «the system will take care of it: the
adversarial process will produce
justice.»
The fact that we fully subsidize litigation, while offering scant support to less
adversarial dispute resolution
processes, strikes me as a wrong - headed choice of priorities in the allocation of public dollars; it is peculiar, and probably an artifact of older values and priorities, that we direct 95 % or more of our
justice system funding toward the dispute resolution mechanism that is the most destructive, most expensive, least efficient and least expeditious.
The list of adaptations and alterations that might help litigants without counsel better negotiate the family
justice system continues, of course, and could include the codification and simplification of the rules of evidence, the rewriting of legislation to eliminate
adversarial language and presumptions, and a reorientation of the dispute resolution default setting from litigation to
processes that take place outside the courthouse.
When I read «the paths to
justice are diverse» I wonder if you (or Ab) would characterize the
adversarial judicial
process as one path among other possible paths?
«Although the Crown is entitled to act as a strong advocate within the
adversarial process, it can not adopt a purely
adversarial role towards the defence,» wrote Superior Court
Justice Robert Reid in setting out the issues in considering the defence's mistrial application in the murder case of R. v. Suarez - Noa on Friday.
They are thus free, subject always to their enabling legislation and the principles of fundamental
justice, to develop their own policies and
processes, their own rules of evidence and their own dispute resolution methods,
adversarial and otherwise.
Practically, this is all logical, sensible stuff, although I think there is some tension between
Justice Rothstein's suggestion that an appellate court may intervene in the
adversarial process when it sees a risk of error that affects the outcome, and his claim that such cases will be very rare.
The ombudsman approach does not involve representing a client, an
adversarial process, or a legally enforceable decision, yet it results in fair treatment for individuals from public authorities — administrative
justice.