Tuesday, January 14, 2020
Political Aspects of Criminal Justice Essay
Introduction            A criminal justice system in any country is enshrined in the country’s executive branches. It is usually enshrined on the judiciary arm of the government and handles all criminal cases and decides who should be prosecuted. (Shaffer & Herington, p36-40) The criminal justice system is also entrusted with the structures that comprise the whole justice system. It comes up with the provisions that cater for emergence of new crimes. It also enforces the laws to make sure that everyone complies with them to maintain and enhance order in the society. The criminal justice system is comprised of all the justice systems right from the local to the national levels (Bonnie, p688).The degree of criminal offence determines the structure that should handle it. Minor crimes can be handled at the lowest level, for instance, by police who maintain order by arresting and assigning some punishments to the offenders and eventually releasing them. This system involves cooperation of the people at the grassroots level. (Alexander, p67-78)            Criminal justice system enhances internal protection of the citizens. Citizens are protected from the internal enemies who are out to cause harm to them. It also checks the excesses of the offenders and instills fear in them. This system has played an important role in tracking down criminals and ensuring that justice is done on the offenders. For instance, murderers, robbers, drug traffickers, rapists have been tracked down and put behind bars, thanks to the criminal justice system. This promotes security in the country and promotes the freedom of movement. People can move from one point to another without the fear of being held hostage, kidnapped, raped or killed. As a result people are free to pursue their common good and can even engage in money generating activities or other businesses that promote their livelihood. (Bonnie, p688)            Criminal justice system prevents war or clashes within a country. A sense of peace and harmony is maintained and hence they are able to maintain positive interactions. As a result, a cohesive society is created and everyone is able to pursue their businesses. (Neilstrong, p40-p40)            Criminal justice system has evolved over the years from a primitive era to an advanced era. The executive branch is divided into three stages at primary and secondary level. The three eras can be summarized as traditional (1776- 1899), transitional era which took place between (1900-1927) and finally nationalization era which fell between 1964 to present time. (Bonnie, p688) Traditional Era (1776-1899)            This is the earliest era of criminal justice system in America. It details the most primitive form of criminal justice system. During this time the justice system was devolved and people were in control of the most decisions affecting the country as well as the presidency (Shaffer & Herington, p36-40). During this time, the president was not in control of the country since decisions were made by the citizens. The community decided what problems was affecting them and prioritize them and finally came up with a modality on how to solve them. The decisions were not central, that is, left to the central government.            During this time, people were given proof on how their money was spent and therefore the executive would account for every single penny spent. The community based team which was in charge of solving problems being experienced in the community were prosecutors, police parole and probation officers, judges, church leaders, community residents and school leaders (Shaffer & Herington, p36-p40).These leaders were presenting the local community. All the decisions and plans were first handled by them before being handed over to the higher authority. It is worth noting that at this time the process of decision making was slow. This is because of the many levels that a court case had to go through before passing a judgment. The judgments passed were either very light or too harsh. For instance, slaves were beaten and tortured. Some even died in the process for committing very mild offences. There were no laws protecting them, and therefore they fell victims of abuses. If a slave was murdered by his master, no action was taken against him, he was not imprisoned. Unfortunately, it promoted a lot of evil against slaves who were blacks at this time. (Shaffer, p36-p40)            The justice system at that time did not cater for many crimes being committed. For instance, there were no legal systems put in place to punish government officials. There was detention without trial and in most cases some forms of dictatorship were evident (Alexander, p67-78). There were no rehabilitation centers for criminals and hence any criminal was either imprisoned and was not given a chance to reform and become a better person. The only advantage with this era was that it was not dominated by the presidency. People had a louder voice and were easily heard by the authority and therefore their needs were sorted out fast. The criminal justice system was felt even by those at very low levels. Transitional Era (1900-1927)            During this time, there were some changes being felt by the people. The devolution of the powers of the criminal justice system was not devolved like in the past. This era encouraged a more centralized form of government. The decisions began to be made at the top and gradually trickled down to the bottom. The criminal justice system stopped being too harsh on the citizens (Bonnie, p688). The citizens were beaten and locked up in the cells, and there were no developed mechanisms to investigate crime. Most serious crimes were left unattended and forensic laboratories were at the initial stages of development. During this time, however the taxpayers’ money was used to build better prison cells and therefore the torture chambers were done away with. It promoted fair trials and many people began to be prosecuted including the Whites. The cells promoted decency in handling human beings. (Neilstrong, p40-40)            The government began educating people about change and development. Proper government structures that deal with crime were set up. The people who handled criminal cases were more educated and understood the system better. There were open policies of discussion and leadership was promoted in all structures and systems of government. The leaders served as models to be copied by young citizens and therefore the justice system was streamlined. All the prosecutions were based on concrete evidence (Alexander, p67-78). The most evident thing about this era was that the criminal justice system was going through a process of change. People were hungry for better systems of government. They started to believe in the government since it was holding all the resources that they needed. They believed that only the government had the power to cater for all their needs. For the people to realize this change they had to give up some of their ambitions. Power without resources was nothing. Without the money and power structures, their money would always remain weak and they would not be able to guard themselves against enemies. The state was gradually being allowed to be in control. This is because all power was vested on it and they had higher control on everyone and every department. At this time prosecutors became generalists and started operating out of their decentralized offices. This way they were able to closely work with the police and the society on important issues that mattered most to the residents locally. (Shaffer, p36-40)            During this era, when people from all the corners of the country felt angry and isolated from the government as well as their representatives, then the better option was to move closer to the community whereby they felt that the community was responding well. However, the fear was that, the community could not give them much but only the state would. In America, some cities, for instance, New York began to experiment with the neighboring courts. The court did not only give out sanctions but also offer one stop shop for a number of services both social and economic. For example, drugs for treatment. This was aimed at coming up with solutions to solve the problems present at that time. There was proliferation of courts that dealt with drug cases in the whole country. This was a reflection of growth in appreciation and coming up with tailor made responses to answer to the concerns made locally. (Neilstrong, p40-p40)            At this level however, community policing was evident and people were responding well to the status of the government and cooperation was promoted in all areas. Nationalization Era (1964 to Present)            At this era all the decisions were made at the national level. The criminal justice system was centralized and all the decisions were made by top government officials. The presidency at this time assumed the role of Commander In Chief of the Armed Forces. The sitting president could not be prosecuted because he was the overall head. If charges were brought against them he gave a ‘no prosecution order’. This is called ‘nolle prosequi’. That is, he could not be prosecuted at any time. All the political decisions related to the criminal activities were handled by the state. The criminal justice system became more and more bureaucratic and lengthy. There was a backlog of cases since all the criminal cases were under one system. (Alexander, p67-78)            Nationalization era developed prisons and new ways of transforming the prisons was invested. Forensic laboratories were employed to investigate any type of criminal case. There were more developed and modern rehabilitation centers. Not any crime could land a person in prison. They came up with new techniques of measuring criminal cases. The people who were found to measure up to them were referred to rehabilitation centers to reform them. (Shaffer, p36-40)            The domination of the presidency and the desire to control the criminal justice system however promoted many evils in the state. For example many offences committed by the president have not been looked into due to his excessive powers. He is simply above the law. It also bred other evils such as assassination crimes. Most presidents have been known to assassinate their rivals if they pose a threat to their presidency. In essence, the presidency has abused the criminal justice system. All the powers have been taken away from the local government and it has rendered it a ‘toothless dog’ as far as criminal justice system is concerned. (Bonnie, p688)            From the nationalization era it is evident that the presidency has moved to dominate the criminal justice system on most of its issues. This can be explained from the excessive powers vested on the presidency. It practically controls all the other arms of the government, which means it is untouchable. (Neilstrong, p40-p40) The disadvantage with this situation is that it has on many occasions abused the powers and privileges vested on it. The presidency influences all the decisions made at the parliamentary level and influences the powers of the judiciary, and other organizations which oversee the work and activities of the government. For instance, organizations which are supposed to investigate the government’s unethical behavior. When investigations are made and concluded, they are never released. This is done to protect the image of the present government and the presidency. Offenders of such crimes are never made public. Despite the government having enough liabilities, it is always made to appear perfect and blameless. Nationalization era has bred very corrupt government officials. (Alexander, p67-78)            The US was not better in the earlier period. This is because; the state kind of government could not bring the resources closer to the people. They have very many states and a state government could not devolve the resources available equitably and equally. The federal government is therefore better and improved the economy as well as expanding the democratic space. The people now have more control of the local government and they can control the resources which have been placed at their disposal. For a country (nation) as big as US only a federal kind of government can work. A centralized state would encourage community policing which cannot be applied in the modern world. (Bonnie, p688) Conclusion            Despite the gains of a state government, I believe that for a growing state the federal kind of government is more desirable. This is because people can access resources faster and more easily. In addition, it is not cumbersome and neither is it bureaucratic and hence decisions are easily made faster and much more conveniently. Federal government is the way to go since it discourages crime at high levels of government as well as corruption. The citizens are more in touch with their leaders and they can easily express themselves. Works Cited. Alexander, S. Political Government: To What Extent Do Governments, Control Systems           of Government, Harvard Press, 2003 (P67-p78) 2nd Ed Bonnie, B. Community Criminal Justice: What Community Policing Teaches Harts       Mitch. D.C, Washington, 2004 (p 688) Vol I Neilstrong, B. Federalism and State Government: The Way to Go, Palgrave Publishers, United States of America, 2002 (p40-p40) Shaffer, S& Herington, C. Aspect of Good Governance, Harvard University Press, UK  2001 (p34-p40) Vol I 2nd Ed.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.