Trial

Government agencies (such as the former US Employment Standards Administration) enforce labour law (legislature, regulatory, or judicial).

The assumption is that the truth is more likely to emerge from the open contest between the prosecution and the defense in presenting the evidence and opposing legal arguments, with a judge acting as a neutral referee and as the arbiter of the law.

[3][4][5] In civil law legal systems, the responsibility for supervising the investigation by the police into whether a crime has been committed falls on an examining magistrate or judge who then conducts the trial.

The examining magistrate or judge acts as an inquisitor who directs the fact-gathering process by questioning witnesses, interrogating the suspect, and collecting other evidence.

The lawyers who represent the interests of the state and the accused have a limited role to offer legal arguments and alternative interpretations to the facts that emerge during the process.

All the interested parties are expected to cooperate in the investigation by answering the magistrate or judge's questions and, when asked, supplying all relevant evidence.

Although lay assessors do sit as a form of jury to offer advice to the magistrate or judge at the conclusion of the trial, their role is subordinate.

Further, because a professional has been in charge of all aspects of the case to the conclusion of the trial, there are fewer opportunities to appeal the conviction alleging some procedural error.

If a mistrial is declared, the case at hand may be retried at the discretion of the plaintiff or prosecution, as long as double jeopardy does not bar that party from doing so.