The Faces Of Justice And State Authority

A leading legal scholar provides a highly original comparative analysis of how justice is administered in legal systems around the world and of the profound and often puzzling changes taking place in civil and criminal procedure. Constructing a conceptual framework of the legal process based on the link between politics and justice, Mirjan R. Damaska provides a new perspective that enables disparate procedural features to emerge as fascinating recognizable patterns. His book is "a significant work of scholarship . . . full of important insights."—Harold J. Berman

Well-chosen negative legal proof rules can be useful procedural safeguards. They existed in both pre-modern and modern criminal procedures.

In this important book, a distinguished legal scholar examines how the legal culture and institutions in Anglo-American countries affect the way in which evidence is gathered, sifted, and presented to the courts. Mirjan Damaska focuses on the significance of the divided tribunal (between judge and jury), the concentrated character of trials ("day-in-court" justice), and the prominent role of the parties in adjudication (the adversary system). Throughout he contrasts the Anglo-American system with Continental, or civil- law justice, where lay fact finders sit with professional judges in unified tribunals, proceedings are episodic rather than concentrated, and the parties have fewer responsibilities than in the common-law tradition. Damaska describes the impact of the traditional institutional environment on the gathering and handling of evidence in common- law jurisdictions and then explores recent transformations of this environment: trial by jury has dramatically declined, pretrial proceedings have greatly proliferated, the adversary system shows signs of weakening in some types of cases. As a result, many rules and practices supporting the treatment of evidentiary material are in danger of becoming extinct. In addition, says Damaska, the increasing use of scientific methods of inquiry could place further strains on the use of traditional common-law evidence. In the future we should expect greater variety in decisionmaking activity, with factual inquiries tailored to the specific type of proceeding and common-law evidence restricted to a narrow sphere

This book is questions whether the discovery of truth is the central aim of the rules and practices of criminal investigation and trial.

Criminal punishment in America is harsh and degrading--more so than anywhere else in the liberal west. Executions and long prison terms are commonplace in America. Countries like France and Germany, by contrast, are systematically mild. European offenders are rarely sent to prison, and when they are, they serve far shorter terms than their American counterparts. Why is America so comparatively harsh? In this novel work of comparative legal history, James Whitman argues that the answer lies in America's triumphant embrace of a non-hierarchical social system and distrust of state power which have contributed to a law of punishment that is more willing to degrade offenders.

Requirements for the defendant to actively participate in the English criminal process have been increasing in recent years such that the defendant can now be penalised for their non-cooperation. This book explores the changes to the defendant’s role as a participant in the criminal process and the ramifications of penalising a defendant’s non-cooperation, particularly its effect on the adversarial system. The book develops a normative theory which proposes that the criminal process should operate as a mechanism for calling the state to account for its accusations and request for official condemnation and punishment of the accused. It goes on to examine the limitations placed on the privilege against self-incrimination, the curtailment of the right to silence, and the defendant’s duty to disclose the details of his or her case prior to trial. The book shows that, by placing participatory requirements on defendants and penalising them for their non-cooperation, a system of obligatory participation has developed. This development is the consequence of pursuing efficient fact-finding with little regard for principles of fairness or the rights of the defendant.