Right to a fair trial
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
| Criminal procedure |
|---|
| Criminal trials and convictions |
| Rights of the accused |
| Right to a fair trial · Speedy trial |
| Jury trial · Presumption of innocence |
| Exclusionary rule (U.S.) |
| Self-incrimination · Double jeopardy |
| Verdict |
| Acquittal · Conviction |
| Not proven (Scot.) · Directed verdict |
| Sentencing |
| Mandatory · Suspended · Custodial |
| Dangerous offender (Can.) |
| Capital punishment · Execution warrant |
| Cruel and unusual punishment |
| Post-conviction events |
| Parole · Probation |
| Tariff (UK) · Life licence (UK) |
| Miscarriage of justice |
| Exoneration · Pardon |
| Related areas of law |
| Criminal defenses |
| Criminal law · Evidence |
| Civil procedure |
| Portals: Law · Criminal justice |
The Right to a fair trial is an essential right in all countries respecting the rule of law. It is explicitly proclaimed in Article Ten of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the Sixth Amendment of the US Constitution, and Article Six of the European Convention of Human Rights, as well as numerous other constitutions and declarations throughout the world.
The essential ingredients for a fair and just civil trial must include a competent, neutral and detached judge (an independent judge); the absence of any intimidation of witnesses and ideally, an equal weight of arms, i.e. a level playing field in terms of legal representation, such as a right to counsel for criminal defendants.
[edit] Divergent approaches
These are general principle, and, understandably, there exist divergent approaches and appreciation to what constitutes a fair trial. Proponents of both major classes of systems of criminal procedure (the adversarial system and the inquisitorial system) allege that their system offers defendant a fairer trial than the other system. There may be differences on points of procedures: for instance, some jurisdictions, in certain circumstances, allow trials of defendants in their absence (in absentia) while some other jurisdictions consider that a trial can only be fair if the defendant has attended it.
In cases of extradition, the extraditing country generally requires that the country requesting extradition offers the defendant a fair trial. In some cases, this has led to some procedural defenses by defendants who alleged that their trial would not be fair according to the rules of the extraditing country. As an example, murderer Ira Einhorn waged a legal battle against his extradition from France to the state of Pennsylvania on grounds that his trial occurred in absentia and rendered a final judgment.
