Peculiarities of the American adversarial criminal justice system and the special role of the lawyer

Cover Page

Cite item

Full Text

Open Access Open Access
Restricted Access Access granted
Restricted Access Subscription or Fee Access

Abstract

Although the modern adversarial system of criminal justice is referred to as the Anglo-American system, there are significant differences between the English and American models. The American model is sometimes referred to as the most extreme or radical version of adversarialism because it provides for the most radical form of courtroom battle between the prosecution and defense before a neutral third party, grants the right to a jury trial in all cases, and enshrines strict procedural rules of trial and evidence. The article analyzes the historical reasons for the divergence in the ways of development of English and American adversarial models and their characteristic features. The author also pays attention to the leading role of the lawyer in the American criminal process, traces the historical roots of this phenomenon. As a result of the study, the author concludes that the historical circumstances of the formation of American statehood in opposition to British colonialism played a significant role in the formation of the American model of the adversarial system. This system is unique to the United States and is deeply rooted in its culture and traditions. This can also explain the unique position of lawyers, and criminal defense lawyers in particular, in the United States. Only in the U.S. is the legal profession and highly influential, including at the political level.

Full Text

Restricted Access

About the authors

Oleg A. Yastrebov

Peoples’ Friendship University of Russia named after Patrice Lumumba

Author for correspondence.
Email: yastrebov-oa@rudn.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0003-4943-6940
SPIN-code: 7824-4837

Dr. Sci. (Law), Professor, Rector of the University, Head of the Department of Administrative and Financial Law at the Law Institute

Russian Federation, Moscow

Kirill E. Belsky

BELSKY & PARTNERS Insurance Company

Email: kirill@belskiy.partners
ORCID iD: 0009-0004-2276-4455
SPIN-code: 5151-8193

Managing partner

Russian Federation, Moscow

References

  1. ABA 1970 [this c/b ABA Stds Relating to Prosecution Function & Defense Function Approved Draft 1971. New York : Institute of Judicial Administration; available from the American Bar Association, Chicago].
  2. Alford, John R., "We're All in This Together: The Decline of Trust in Government, 1958–1996" in John R. Hibbing & Elizabeth Theiss-Morse, eds (2001) What Is It About Government That Americans Dislike (Caimburge UK Cambridge Univ Press 2001).
  3. Beaney, W. (1955). The Right to Counsel in American Courts. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
  4. Fiss, Owen M., "Against Settlement" (1984) 93 The Yale Law Journal 1089-90.
  5. Fleming, Macklin, The Price of Perfect Justice, Basic Books, Inc. New York, 1974
  6. Goodpaster, G. (1986). The Adversary System, Advocacy, and Effective Assistance of Counsel in Criminal Cases. NYU Review of Law and Social Change, 14, 90.
  7. Huntington, Samuel P., American Politics: The Promise of Disharmony 33 (Cambridge MA: Belknap Press. 1981).
  8. Jonakait, Randolph N., The Rise of the American Adversary System: America Before England, 14 Widener Law Review (2008)
  9. Landsman, Stephan, The Adversary System: A Description and Defense, American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research, 1984.
  10. Luban, David, The Adversary System Excuse in The Good Lawyer: Lawyers' Roles and Lawyers' Ethics (David Luban ed) Totowa NJ: Rowman & Allanheld 83 (1983).
  11. McConville, Mike & Chester Mirsky, The Rise of Guilty: New York, 1800-1865, 22 J. of Law & Soc’y 443 (1995)
  12. Pizzi, William T. Trials Without Truth chapter 6 (New York: New York Univ. Press 1999).
  13. Rhode, Deborah L., (1985) 37 "Ethical Perspectives on Legal Practice" Stanford Law Review 594
  14. Roberts, J., & Loretta, J. (2000). Public Opinion, Crime, and Criminal Justice. Boulder: Westview Press
  15. Roosevelt, T. (1917, May). Report. Metropolitan Magazine
  16. Silver, Charles, & Frank Cross, What’s Not to Like About Being a Lawyer?, 109 Yale L. J. 1443 (2000), 1452
  17. Smith, R. (1919). Justice and the Poor. New York: New York City.
  18. Strick, A. (1977). Injustice for All. New York: G.P. Putnam’s Sons.
  19. Wills, Garry, A Necessary Evil: A History of American Distrust of Government (NY Simon & Schuster 17, 318 (1999).
  20. Thibaut, John et al., Procedural Justice as Fairness, 26 Stan.L.Rev.1271 (1973–1974)

Supplementary files

Supplementary Files
Action
1. JATS XML

Copyright (c) 2025 Yur-VAK

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.