Last week, Mr Justice Ryder, who is in charge of modernising the family justice system, has described what he feels is the way forward, by scrapping the adversarial process and replacing it, with an inquisitorial one. The differences between the two systems can be great, however the underlying distinction between them is that in the inquisitorial process, judges have far greater control than they do in the adversarial model, which has currently dominated our family courts.
That judicial control, Mr Justice Ryder has said, will take the form, amongst other things, of greater say over the appointment of experts, effectively allowing judges to make decisions on welfare that they have not had the chance to decide on, in the past. (You can read his speech in full, here).
So, what do you think? Will the removal of an adversarial system and the placement of an inquisitorial one make things better, or is it just window dressing? Take our poll, leave a comment, if you dare!
PS Apologies for the typo in the poll. We don’t want to keep editing it, as votes will be lost!
Researching Reform 
The very word Inquisition and its contained energy tells it all.
Family law courts are Inquisition courts already- star chamber with the witch finders and the General-old Jesuit system.
“The new court will launch after the summer of 2013 and said Ryder, it ‘will be a vehicle for a radical change of culture.’ ”
Oh it surely will be a change all right. Right back to the dark ages.
I can smell that old Inquisition witch trial stench brewing already.
So where is the right to equal arms?
Many service users already suffer legal abuse syndrome.
“LEGAL ABUSE SYNDROME (LAS) is a form of post traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). It is a psychic injury, not a mental illness. It is a personal injury that develops in individuals assaulted by ethical violations, legal abuses, betrayals, and fraud. Abuse of power and authority and a profound lack of accountability in our courts have become rampant.”
http://www.judicialaccountability.org/legalabuse.htm
LikeLike
Like birds of a feather,judges,social workers,guardians,lawyers,and hired experts flock together ever anxious to cover up each other’s errors rather than correct them!
Deciding whether the court system is adversarial or inquisitorial is pure sophistry.The “ss” and parents will always be adversaries whatever posture the judge chooses to adopt ! Give parents the same protection as criminals in their courts if you want to see real change !
LikeLike
The danger is that the judges, as admitted by LJ ward are not experts in anything other than law and legal procedure, will follow past practice…the constant repetition of words like attachment show the judges already brain washed in an untested theory…
if judges choose experts and you wont be allowed to argue about it, then forget any sense of justice real or imagined…..
private law can be easily simplified and still allow access to Court for argument….public law needs an overhaul not in the law but the administration of the law.
It is a joke that the Dept of Education Select Committee only heard from one witness for the arguments against the system (and in doing so deprived itself of necessary evidence on why the system is being complained about) and only heard from those with vested interests….
child protection cannot be a remit for Education but must be transferred back to dept of Health (logical body)….
tinkering with the system wihout knowing of the causes of problems at the State and judicial level is a waste of time……at the end of the day judge will become executioner of the outcome and the procedure….It’s time the judiciary stood up for the public to protect them from abuses of power by social workers.
As Voltaire stated in his contemporary novel Candide: “In this country, it is wise to kill an admiral from time to time to encourage the others.” Until the root dishonesty and abuse of power by the LAs are dealt with in wont matter what a judges role is.
LikeLike