TIL: The US has an “adversarial legal system” in which the court acts as arbiter between plaintiff and defendant. Most other countries have an “inquisitorial legal system” in which the court takes an active role in investigating the case.https://twitter.com/robinhanson/status/1116418648342781954 …
-
Show this thread
-
Replying to @KevinSimler
My personal view is that this is not the easy goal it might appear to be. The incentives set up by adversarial legal systems hugely increase the rate of change in the legal system. An ‘active court’ can sometimes be just another risk-averse institution that moves v slowly
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @gbrl_dick
Cool, thanks. (Caveat: I haven’t thought much about this at all.) What are some of the speedy changes we get from an adversarial legal system?
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @KevinSimler
I’m from Aus and not an expert! I don’t know of any perfect examples, but consent within marriage is one I’ve read about that was driven by the (adversarial) legal system ahead of the legislature in the UK. Much of Europe did it through legislation.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like
thanks, that was a great example & gives me a feel for the kind of changes you’re talking about. seems pretty important
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.