Justice is the very essence of the traditional criminal justice system. This formal system involves the intervention of the state in remedying socially disapproved behaviors by particular individuals in the society. As such, the process strives to punish the offender accordingly and in so doing ensure that justice is served for both the victim and the offender. However, there has been a growing debate on the use of other alternatives to the criminal justice system. This has arisen due to various factors such as a growing dissatisfaction on the traditional criminal justice system in its failure to serve the victim’s search for justice.
Many people believe that death penalty is not a justifiable approach for murderers, but does not justice mandate that criminals receive what they deserve? The punishment must fit the crime. If a burglar deserves imprisonment, then a murderer deserves death. Death penalty as cruel as it may seem serves to deter crime rates, acknowledges the value of human life, administers justice, and gives a closure to atrocity. First and foremost, death penalty serves as a fear factor for many criminals.
The law is becoming more flexible with criminals in a way that there is not enough punishment against them, with the exact punishment a criminal could understand about his mistakes. The law should be applied strict according to the grade of the crime a criminal commit, if the law continues with flexibility of punishment, criminals will commit crime since the moment they get out of jail. Some of the changes created for a more flexible way to evade punishment are the incorporation of rehabilitation for criminals, the creation of parole, the creation of probation, the use of “parens patriae”, the
Wrongful convictions have plagued the world throughout history. When crimes are committed the public feels ascertain a way about the situation. Depending on the severity of the issues, the last thing the public wants is for the criminals to get away. The pressure intensifies to catch some one for the crime. The technology advancements alone have led to several cold cases freeing the wrongfully convicted.
There are various charges against the employment of restorative justice. Basically, these charges critic the work and ideas of the way restorative justice aims at addressing crime in society. Let’s explore the following charge; “Restorative justice does not fit the thinking of legal practitioners”. (Batley 2005; 24). Thus, legal practitioners often argue that this approach is not fit enough for the criminal justice system.
As further rulings go on, it is eventually determined that with careful statues put in place that limits the abilities of the jury to rule capital punishment, the death penalty is officially said to not be unconstitutional. In our United States history, several rights of citizens have been interpreted differently by our judicial branch. During World War 1, two acts called the Sedition Act of 1918 and the Espionage Act of 1917 ruled that in times of national crisis, people can be prosecuted if they speak out against the government in a disloyal or threatening manner. This was seen as a violation of our freedom
Navsa JA seems to of the opinion that the defence should be retained but must be approached with extreme caution, especially in situations where the provocation was a once-off triggered event. It should only be applied by using legitimate inferences to determine the accused’s state of mind without too readily believing the ipse dixit of the
That there are severe imperfections in the justice system which could likely result in a situation where innocent victim might be executed can be seen in the review of cases by the Supreme Court. That it is biased against the poor and the marginalized can be seen in the socio-economic profile of the convicts. It is violation of the right to life and the right not to be treated cruelly. Yet, the government maintains that is effective in combating crime. It imposes the mandatory death penalty on 21 crimes while the other 25 crimes are death eligible.
The court may order the party found at fault to pay money to the injured party or to fulfill an obligation, such as honoring a contract. • Criminal law considers a crime an act against society rather than an individual. Therefore, the government brings legal action against a person for committing a crime. If found guilty, the defendant may have to pay a fine, serve time in jail or prison, or be placed on probation. The law and society view jail time, or incarceration, as the loss of one 's personal freedom and thus, a more severe penalty than a monetary fine.
Fair trial essentially includes speedy justice. Delay in disposal of case not only brings prejudice to the parties but also puts the whole system of administration of justice to jeopardy. Delay in conclusion of trial immensely affects both the parties. If an accused is innocent in fact, he carries the label accused and suffers for a very long time. The situation gets worse if he is denied bail during pendency of trial or appeal.