The legal system of today's western countries is divided into two categories, the common law system represented by Anglo-American countries, and the civil law system represented by continental European countries. The civil law system is closer to the legal system of our country, while for the common law system, we know more about it from Western movies. In 2020, a crime-themed film "The Duke of " will be released. Although this British film is boring, it explains what the common law system is through a real case. The
movie is based on a real event. On August 3, 1961, the British National Gallery grandly displayed a famous painting just acquired, the classic work "The Duke of Wellington" by the Spanish national treasure painter Goya . However, after just 19 days, the famous painting was stolen, causing an uproar across the country. What makes people even more incredible is that four years later this priceless work was found in the lost and found office of a London train station. A retired bus driver later turned himself in to police, admitting he was responsible for the theft that shocked the nation.
Jim Broadbent and Helen Mirren starred in this crime movie, but it was a big disappointment that the supposedly exciting theft plot was treated as a kind of paediatric The form of the film is presented, on the contrary, the highlight of the film is the court trial at the end.
In most civil law countries, the theft of national cultural relics in the film will undoubtedly be severely punished, and the old man in the film was only sentenced to three months in prison. What makes people even more incredible is that the crime targeted by the court's decision is that the old man destroyed the frame of the art gallery when he took the famous painting. On the prosecutor's charge of theft, the court verdict turned out to be not guilty.
This bland film brilliantly illustrates the essence of the common law system. Law is not "invented" from the top down, but "discovered" from the bottom up.
In the courtroom, the barrister played by Matthew Goode did not argue with the prosecution on any legal provisions, but tried his best to explain that the old man had neither subjective malice nor objective damage to the famous painting. The lawyer cleverly made a metaphor, comparing the behavior of the old man to borrowing the neighbor's weeder without consent. This easy-to-understand metaphor was accepted by the jury and directly led to the final verdict of not guilty. The movie
explains the biggest feature of the common law system, "the jury system". In court trials in common law countries, the court will select local ordinary people to serve as jurors. These jurors do not need to have legal expertise, they only need to have normal thinking skills and good credit history. The division of labor between the jury and the judge is that the former makes a right or wrong judgment on the case according to the local public order and good customs, while the judge makes a sentencing according to the jury's verdict.
As we can see in the movie, the jury just gave the defendant's "guilty" or "innocent" judgment, and the judge then sentenced the defendant to three months in prison based on the jury's judgment. It is precisely because of the non-professional nature of the jury that it will make a decision that is in line with the will of the public according to the general concept of the majority of the local society.
The historical origin of the "common law system" comes from the unique attributes of the British island nation.
As the birthplace of the modern western legal system, the United Kingdom adopts a "common law system" different from other European countries, while the continental European countries adopt a "civil law system".
Historically speaking, the so-called law is the result of the game between the king and the nobles. If a country wants to adopt a "top-down" legislative system, the king must have a strong military force, especially the army. However, as an island country, Britain, in ancient times, its external threats could only come from the sea, so the king had no reason to maintain a strong army. The need for overseas expansion makes its military resources necessarily tilt toward the navy, including the air force in the future. So the UK has the Royal Navy and the Royal Air Force, but never the Royal Army.
Contrary to this, the continental states of the feudal era were driven by the need for national defense, will inevitably build a strong army, and this army can be used by the king to resist foreign aggression, and can also be used by the king to implement his own laws internally.
The different historical and geographical conditions of each country have led to the adoption of different legal systems in each country. Whether it is a "common law system" or a "civil law system", there is no such thing as superior or inferior. Only the law that suits one's own country is the best law.
