In the U.S.A. we operate under the English Common Code of Law which means we are innocent until proven guilty. In Mexico and most of Latin American countries they operate under the Napoleonic Code of Law, which means that you are guilty until proven innocent.

Mexican Insurance

How many coutries of the world still operate their justice systems under the Napoleonic Code?

Sitran

Some state of US at the time when "A Streetcar Named Desire" took place.

In the drama Stanley tries to find out from his sister-in-law Branche what happened to her family plantation Belle Reve, claiming that by Napoleonic Law he has title to properties of his wife Stella, who is Branche’s sister.

The state in question may have abolished state laws influence by Napoleonic Code of Law, but it is an entertaining proof of Continental laws on American jurisprudence.

[quote author=Sitran link=board=wordsuggest;num=1086925275;start=0#0 date=06/10/04 at 23:41:15]

How many coutries of the world still operate their justice systems under the Napoleonic Code?

Sitran

We do, and the French too. But I’ve never heard anything other than that someone’s innocent until proven guilty. ???

It is always harder to prove a negative than it is a positive!

Ouch!  And I thought that the Belguiques were over that!

Sorry, we are English (in Law and Tradition) and ‘ave the Magna Carta, you know, the Big Letter!

Don’t get caught in Turkey!

Sitran

I should ask someone who studied law, but I really don’t think someone is guilty over here until proven otherwise. I’ve never heard any story that suggested otherwise.

A few days ago, Jean-Michel Nihoul was acquitted for his alleged part in the Dutroux case, although the prosecution explicitly argued that he could not prove he wasn’t involved. This argument was ridiculed by the defense and by the press, though not by everyone (there’s still those who desperately want to believe he was involved.) We’ll never know if he was (I personally doubt it), but as there wasn’t a shred of evidence against him, it would have been a disgrace if he had been condemned.

It seems obvious that your Napoleonic Code has gone awry!

Spiff, I am sure that it all seems very civilized, but the Napoleonic Code is where we, US, get our sense of marshal law!

This is not what we expect from the peacetime understanding of  a constitution that allows for a "president" to execute mandates beyond the purview of the Constitution!  (nor the Magna Carta!).

[url=http://www.bl.uk/collections/treasures/magnatranslation.html]      
Text of the Magna Carta[/url]

Got to love it!

"Written in haste, but with the utmost mental and metaphysical expediency!"

Sitran

I have to visit one of the copies of Magna Carta regularly. It is extremely difficult to read - it is in scrawny Latin, and every other word is an abbreviation. It is really all about the gripes of a bunch of landowners. So, ‘pleading the fifth’ here is promising to look after your parks and ponds!

I don’t think the Code Napoléon ever said that someone is guily until proven innocent. However, I listened to radio interview a few weeks ago that talked about some difficulties in the harmonization of UK and EU law. I think there was some point about the difference between the burden of proof and something that sounded quite similar. I think the drift was that the Code has the same absolute burden, but has a different procedure to achieve it.

BYOBOP

- Garzo.

[quote author=Sitran link=board=wordsuggest;num=1086925275;start=0#0 date=06/10/04 at 23:41:15]

How many coutries of the world still operate their justice systems under the Napoleonic Code?

If memory serves correct, la belle Province de Quebec operates under the Napoleonic Code while the rest of Canada uses the British Common Law.

I was convinced that the burden of proof must still rest with the prosecution, and that the accused is innocent until proven guilty under Code Napoléon. This makes me sure about that conviction

Déclaration des droits de l’Homme et du citoyen
26 août 1789
...
Article 9 - Tout homme étant présumé innocent jusqu’à ce qu’il ait été déclaré coupable, s’il est jugé indispensable de l’arrêter, toute rigueur qui ne serait pas nécessaire pour s’assurer de sa personne doit être sévèrement réprimée par la loi.

However, there seems to be a myth that one is presumed guily, and the burden of proof is with the defence. i don’t where this myth comes from, but it may have something to do with the role of the investigating magistrate (juge d’instruction). This can sound like the judiciary is batting for the prosecution, but in fact the investigating magistrate is responsible for determining the facts of the case before it comes to trial rather than refereeing adversarial proceedings, which is always handed to a different judge. In fact, I don’t think you can enter a plea in civil law cases - if you say you’re guilty, the investigating magistrate takes your confession as evidence rather than a plea.

Here’s a decent article on the inquisitorial system.

[quote author=RK link=board=wordsuggest;num=1086925275;start=0#7 date=06/23/04 at 16:42:15]

If memory serves correct, la belle Province de Quebec operates under the Napoleonic Code while the rest of Canada uses the British Common Law.

The Napoleonic Code is the basis for civil matters in "La Belle Province".  But with respect to criminal law, like in all the other provinces, British Common Law (which is based on precedents) is mandated.  

Thanks, Guy!
At least my memory is half right! ;D