Admittedly, I thought I was being concise, but edited my post into a real head-scratcher.
I was thinking along the lines of protections such as presumption of innocence, and burden of proof, as making it hard to convict people. But it does require competent defense to enforce those things.
An example of easy to convict is countries where prominent dissidents are arrested for nebulous "corruption," and basically stand no chance.
I love common law but one aspect that seems inescapably (though perhaps not wholly) negative is the different levels of access to justice that come with different levels of wealth.
I was thinking along the lines of protections such as presumption of innocence, and burden of proof, as making it hard to convict people. But it does require competent defense to enforce those things.
An example of easy to convict is countries where prominent dissidents are arrested for nebulous "corruption," and basically stand no chance.