Some observations on judicial procedure in the Code of Hammurabi

Abstract

Procedural law contained in the Code of Hammurabi does not constitute a separate set of norms and it pertains to criminal and civil lawsuits as defined today. The judiciary was interlinked with
administrative powers. The sovereign (king) was the chief justice; assemblies of elders or council meetings performed a prominent role. Current matters were attended to by numerous administrative
and police clerks. Everything was supervised by an appropriate deity. Proceedings were public and oral. However, forensic writers fulfilled an essential function as every element of proceedings had to be recorded. Written rulings and court transcripts were  particularly significant. In the Code, elements of statutory law and procedural descriptions, used in jurisprudence, and specifically examination of proofs are intermingled. Proofs chiefly included witness testimony and oaths by gods. As writing was common, documents written on clay tablets also constituted good evidence. A typical method of obtaining evidence was ordeal by water. Proceedings took place at trials with the participation of parties and ended with a sentence. Appealing to the sovereign was possible, but there was no formal procedure for appeals. Description of legal cases in the Code of Hammurabi shows that the rules of procedure were clear and obvious, and the objective of a case was to implement the idea of justice promoted by the sovereign. The Code of Hammurabi remains a historical testimony to the impressive legal culture in ancient Mesopotamia in this regard as well.