334 this reason it spread throughout Europe together with the absolutist form of government. Eberhard Schmidt provides the following description of the connection between absolutismand inquisitorial procedure: Im Inquisitionsprozess sieht der zum Absolutismus strebende Obrigkeitstaat das ihm entsprechende Verfahren. Er gibt die ganze Strafverfolgung in die Hand der staatlichen Gewalten; der Inquisitionsrichter, dessen Aufgabe es wird, vom ersten aufkeimenden Verdacht an bis zur Spruchreife des Aktenmaterials das Verfahren durchzufiihren, alles Initiativ von sich aus zu tun, was zur Erforschung der materiellen Wahrheit erforderlich ist, und dabei auch die Interessen des etwa unschuldigen “Inquisiten” an Beibringung und Nachweisung entlastender Momente wahrzunehmen, repräsentiert im Rahmen des Strafprozesses den Geist der absoluten Staatsgewalt, die bevormundend und reglementierend die Angelegenheiten des Untertanen in die Hand nimmt und im Untertanen nur ein unmiindiges Objekt, wie der Regierungstätigkeit im allgemeinen, so auch der Untersuchungstätigkeit dcs Inquisitionsrichters zu sehen vermag. As for adversary procedure, the process is initiated when the plaintiff submits a plaint, or accusatio, to the court. The entire process is characterized by the fact that the plaintiff and the accused confront one another at the trial as two equal parties. The defendent is in a much stronger position in this type of trial than in a trial conducted in the inquisitorial manner, for he has, among other things, the right to present evidence in his own defense and to be represented by counsel. In contrast to the situation in the inquisitorial trial, the judge in the adversary trial plays a more subdued and passive role. The opposing parties themselves determine the course of the trial, and, for the most part, it is they who conduct it. Nonetheless, it is not possible to contrast the conduct of inquisitorial and adversary trials too sharply, for the latter also has certain inquisitorial aspects. For example, judges in adversary trials attempt to determine the objective truth with the help of the same rational types of evidence employed in the inquisitorial trial, and torture was sometimes used to obtain confessions from defendents in the adversary system, too. In such cases, however, it was up to the plaintiff to present and substantiate the circumstantial evidence required in order to move the judge to allow the use of torture. There were two forms of trial procedure in Russia according to the Ulozhenie, or Code of Law, of 1649, namely sud and rozysk. The former, which was regulated in chapter 10 (Osude) of the Ulozhenie, corresponded to adversary procedure, and its original and more simple form, the socalled ochnaia stavka, called for the parties to come before the judge together and to present their cases. The judge then reached a verdict on 123 Schmidt, 194. Ibid., 195, 198—199. 123
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjYyNDk=