Justice Minister Judith Collins has today unveiled the Government’s proposals towards modernising the legal framework for many of New Zealand’s courts. see 100 year old court legislation in for overhaul.
The reality is that the New Zealand courts are modeled on the British legal system which dates back to the middle ages.
In summary it goes like this.
The king is the head of the state, the court is his.
Ordinary people could not speak to the King so they spoke to him through their representatives the Knights Templar. They summarized the situations and put this to the king . The king would decide which story he preferred and give his decision. 
evidence was taken by swearing on the bible and in those days every one knew that the role of the creator was as the ultimate judge so telling a lie would mean you would burn in the fires of Hell. But as Maurice Williamson put it in his rainbow speech , with the evolution of man kind we now know that we would only burn in hell for a few seconds .
Any way the King got too busy so he appointed his representatives to the court, they were called Judges , you can tell that the judges we have today are connected to the past when you look at the ceremonial garments they wear . Now you know why we bow to the Judge .. He / she symbolizes the crown .
Now there are two type’s of system one is called the adversarial system and the other inquisitorial .
The adversarial system which we use in the civil jurisdiction has the judge sitting in an advisory capacity he oversees the action between the two parties.
In reality the parties are in a fight to the death and the judge sits in waiting to declare the survivor the winner . He is more like a referee in a soccer game than like Sherlock homes.
Adversarial system- derives from Roman law the process is the medieval mode of trial by combat- Relating to or characteristic of an adversary; involving antagonistic elements –a person, group, or force that opposes or attacks; opponent; enemy; foe.
I particularly like the definition given here “The definition of adversarial is anything related to a person, place, or thing where there is disagreement, opposition or where problems are created that go against a desired result.” also see
The judge cannot act unless something is pointed out to him and it is up to the parties to put their case before the judge. If you place nothing before the judge he has nothing to balance up and you lose.
The game is about knocking your opponent off the perch and if you think back to your child hood days you will see plenty of strategies. Remember when your sibling pestered you so much that you finally lashed out. well lawyers have not forgotten the chances are that in those days your mum only saw you strike your sibling and you were disciplined for it.. well that is exactly what lawyers do. intimidation is the name of he game any thing to make you lash out fall of the horse and they are declared the victor.
The early Templar nights morphed over the ages and advocates emerged. this was a skill handed down from father to son. They spoke Latin so that the plebs were well and truly out of their depth, this was no doubt a relic from the time that religion, politics and law were all one.
Even in the 18th and 19th century lawyers and judges did not have to have a law degree , we still have one judge in New Zealand who has never held a law degree his skills being passed down through the family line .
So there we have it folks 21st century technology 12th century law. isn’t it time that we brought in the Inquisitorial system –Law (of a trial or legal procedure) characterized by the judge performing an examining role: administration is accompanied by a form of inquisitorial justice – In the inquisitorial system, the presiding judge is not a passive recipient of information. Rather, the presiding judge is primarily responsible for supervising the gathering of the evidence necessary to resolve the case. He or she actively steers the search for evidence and questions the witnesses, including the respondent or defendant. Attorneys play a more passive role, suggesting routes of inquiry for the presiding judge and following the judge’s questioning with questioning of their own. Attorney questioning is often brief because the judge tries to ask all relevant questions. see
Great additional reading
The four Inns of Court have the exclusive right to Call men and women to the Bar – ie to admit those who have fulfilled the necessary qualifications to the degree of Barrister-at-Law, which entitles them, after a period of pupillage (vocational training) either to practise as independent advocates in the Courts of England and Wales or to take employment in government or local government service, industry, commerce or finance.
Thus, to qualify as a barrister, everyone must join an Inn and keep a qualifying session on at least twelve occasions.The government of each Inn is ultimately controlled by the Masters of the Bench, elected mainly from among its members who are also senior members of the judiciary or Queen’s Counsel. In the case of Gray’s Inn there are about 200 Benchers, whose collective formal meetings are known as Pension.The head of the Inn and Chairman of Pension is called the Treasurer.The Masters of the Bench are responsible for admission to the Inn, student discipline and Call to the Bar.
The history is set out very well by the The Honourable Society of the Inner Temple
and in the archives of Grays inn
the other temple sites are locate here
- The Honourable Society of the Middle Temple
- The Honourable Society of Gray’s Inn
- The Honourable Society of Lincoln’s Inn
- Temple church