Final answer:
When there is no system of inquiry in a country, a neutral third-party may be used to gather information and resolve conflicts. Civic engagement and the judiciary, particularly with instruments like a writ of habeas corpus, become critical in ensuring accountability and protecting individual rights. International norms and law also play a role in guiding state behavior where centralized mechanisms are absent.
Step-by-step explanation:
In a country lacking a system of inquiry, such as those for hearings or in-person questioning, an alternative is to introduce a neutral third-party for conflict resolution and gathering information. This third-party can help bridge the gap left by the absence of formal governmental questioning mechanisms. For example, there is a practice in some parliamentary systems where lawmakers are allowed to ask bureaucrats questions during designated times, or submit written queries that require timely responses. However, where these systems do not exist, a third-party can facilitate dialogue and ensure accountability.
Furthermore, in the absence of formal systems, civic engagement, and free speech may become even more crucial. Citizens can exercise influence through means such as political advocacy, public demonstrations, or engaging directly in the political process. The judiciary, in countries that adhere to principles of a rule of law, becomes a vital instrument for seeking redress, as in the case of a writ of habeas corpus that protects individuals from unlawful detention.
In an international context, where the state system is anarchic and no central enforcement exists, norms, diplomacy, and international law help guide state behavior, although these are less coercive and often rely on mutual interests and reciprocity.