The Future of Adversarial and Inquisitorial Systems

Page History

Choose an Area to Edit

Current Left Navigation Widgets

Current Page Widgets

Choose the Number of Areas for This Page

NOTE: Reducing the number of areas will permanently delete any content and widgets in the removed area(s).

Area Positions

  • Area 1 is the main column for the page
  • Area 2 appears to the right of area 1
  • Area 3 appears under area 1

April 7-8, 2017 (Friday-Saturday)
The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill School of Law
CLE Credit: Not Preapproved

rights and remedies in criminal procedure: examining the nature of the relationship

In this conference we will consider the relationship between rights and remedies in criminal procedure in various aspects – including the contrasting approaches of adversarial and inquisitorial traditions and how this illuminates differences in the role of law across jurisdictions; new remedies developed through EU co-operation and ECHR rights-based approaches; and the challenges of international criminal law remedies, where the approach may differ from those operated at the national level.

As part of the Ninth Conference on the Future of Adversarial and Inquisitorial Systems, we seek to consider these issues in context. Is there a difference between adversarial and inquisitorial approaches, or do all the systems apply the criterion of the effective violation of a substantial right? In various systems, legislatures and courts have considered exclusionary rules (mandatory and discretionary), fines, victim compensation and injunctive relief in different contexts.  Rights such as appointed counsel or discovery help shape the system as well, as they shape the regulation of investigation and prosecution.  Different considerations may apply during the investigative and adjudicative phases of criminal cases, with the courts having more discretion to shape rights and remedies in areas within their exclusive domain. 

What is the source of the rights and remedies – legislation or case law? Does case law play the prominent role, leaving to the legislator a secondary (and often ineffective) role? Does the legislator set out the general framework, while the details are regulated by judicial decisions?  And if remedies are the subject of judicial law-making, how is accountability of judicial decisions ensured by the systems?  How much flexibility may systems build into their remedial systems?  Should courts grant a remedy whenever there is a violation of formal provisions, or should harmless error and deterrence guide decision-making?


Interested in attending but can't make the trip to Chapel Hill, NC? This conference will be made available for online viewing. To receive access to the webcast, please email for more information.

Contact Us

If you have any questions regarding this conference, please contact Professor Richard Myers at the University of North Carolina School of Law.

Phone: 919.962.8115

UNC School of Law | Van Hecke-Wettach Hall | 160 Ridge Road, CB #3380 | Chapel Hill, NC 27599-3380 | 919.962.5106 | Accessibility

If you are seeing this, you are either using a non-graphical browser or Netscape 4.x (4.7, 4.8, etc.) and this page appears very plain. If you are using a 4.x version of Netscape, this site is fully functional but lacks styles and optimizations available in other browsers. For full functionality, please upgrade your browser to the latest version of Internet Explorer or Firefox.