Abstract
The article deals with the issue of adversarialism in relation to Czech criminal proceedings. Although it is a frequently mentioned aspect of the criminal process, adversarialism has not yet been established in Czech criminal law scholarship in the broader professional discourse.
Legal practice also treats this concept rather restrainedly and selects certain partial aspects of this problem. In the Czech environment, therefore, one cannot yet speak of a doctrine of adversarialism.
It is questionable whether the new Criminal Procedure Code, if adopted, could change this, since it explicitly mentions adversarialism. The author is of the opinion that adversarialism is an immanent part of every criminal process, especially criminal proceedings before the court.
He considers adversarialism to be a principle which he elaborates in a broader context than is usually stated. He sees the essence of adversarialism in the legitimate clash of allegations and legal opinions, not merely in the right to be informed of the substance of oneʼs accusation and the right to comment on such an accusation.
He considers the audiatur et altera pars rule to be the very minimum and unbreakable guarantee of an adversarial finding of law.