Editing Adversarial system (section)

==Criminal proceedings==
{{unreferenced section|date=March 2023}}

In criminal adversarial proceedings, an accused is not compelled to give evidence. Therefore, they may not be questioned by a prosecutor or judge unless they choose to be; however, should they decide to testify, they are subject to [[cross-examination]] and could be found guilty of [[perjury]]. As the election to maintain an accused person's [[right to silence]] prevents any examination or cross-examination of that person's position, it follows that the decision of counsel as to what evidence will be called is a crucial tactic in any case in the adversarial system and hence it might be said that it is a lawyer's manipulation of the truth. Certainly, it requires the skills of counsel on both sides to be fairly equally pitted and subjected to an impartial judge.

In some adversarial legislative systems, the court is permitted to make [[inference]]s on an accused's failure to face [[cross-examination]] or to answer a particular question. This obviously limits the usefulness of silence as a tactic by the defense. In the United States, the [[Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution|Fifth Amendment]] has been interpreted to prohibit a jury from drawing a negative inference based on the defendant's invocation of his or her right not to testify, and the jury must be so instructed if the defendant requests.

By contrast, while [[defendant]]s in most civil law systems can be compelled to give statements, these statements are not subject to cross-examinations by the prosecution and are not given under oath. This allows the defendant to explain their side of the case without being subject to cross-examination by a skilled opposition. However, this is mainly because it is not the prosecutor but the judge who questions the defendant. The concept of "cross"-examination is entirely due to adversarial structure of the common law.