The accusatorial and adversarial procedures, typical of common law systems, sharply contrast with a legal framework where the court actively investigates the facts of a case. In this latter model, the presiding officer, or a panel thereof, carries the primary responsibility for gathering evidence and interrogating witnesses. The objective is to ascertain the truth through thorough and impartial inquiry, as opposed to relying solely on arguments presented by opposing sides.
This method of legal adjudication places considerable power and responsibility in the hands of judicial authorities. Historically, its application has varied, with some instances focusing on uncovering religious heresy or political dissent. In contemporary usage, it often aims at achieving a high degree of factual accuracy, potentially leading to more just outcomes. This approach also seeks to diminish the impact of legal representation disparities by centralizing the investigatory function.
