Name Instructor Course Date Analysis & Critique of Canadian Court System Introduction The role of the court system is to protect the law by punishing those who break the law. A state must protect its citizens from the acts of law offenders through appropriate channels of punishment…
Download full paperFile format: .doc, available for editing
Extract of sample "Analysis & Critique of Canadian Court System"
Download file to see previous pages
These models are the inquisitorial and the adversary models. The Canadian Court System mostly applies the adversarial process in its legal processes. Adversarial justice system is the best approach to addressing justice and equality in court systems and the Canadian Courts should continue using it. Reasons for the Adversary Justice System The ultimate concern of the adversary court system is to ensure equal treatment between the prosecution and defense. The court assumes a neutral position and acts as referee between the two parties. This system requires all parties to adhere to the law in responding to different issues in the court. For instance, police officers must use the procedures that the law accepts to obtain evidence from suspects or the accused. The court will determine whether the police used the appropriate ways of gathering evidence that are recognized by the law and are free from deception and other malpractices. The neutral state of the court ensures a fair trial for the accused (see Law Commission). Adversary system stresses on strict observance of the law in seeking justice for all parties involved in a case. This characteristic gives the system an added advantage over the inquisitorial justice system. Inquisitorial justice system involves the court in determining facts and evidence about a case. Therefore, the system gives room for bias where the court can favor one side of the case. This is unlike the adversary system that advocates for observance of the law in determining facts about a case. Moreover, the inquisitorial system denies the accused the right of privacy. The system requires the accused to collaborate with the police and other court officials in the process of gathering evidence. The accused has no right of remaining silent throughout the process unlike in the adversary system where the accused has the right of choosing to remain silent throughout the court process. Courts in the adversary justice system act as supervisors of the actions of the prosecution and the accused and eliminate any practices that conflict with the law. The system does not grant the court the authority of supporting the prosecution against the accused. This form of fairness does not exist in the inquisitorial justice system. It is possible for the authority or the police to coerce their authority on the accused in their attempt to gather evidence against him or her. The law does not allow use of evidence that is a result of coercion of authority. Police officers are known to use excessive power in their attempt to gather evidence against victims of crime. Therefore, involving the court and the police in the process is not in the best interests of ensuring equal and just treatment for offenders (see Prasad). The adversary system becomes even stronger when looking at emerging trends in the field of law. For instance, there have been efforts to introduce the system of restorative justice in the court process. Restorative justice is an emerging trend in the court system where victims and offenders interact in the process of seeking justice. Legal procedures are not the basic requirements of punishing an offender under restorative justice. Instead, the offender must take absolute responsibility for his or her actions by convincing the victims that he or she will not repeat such an offense in the future. The system does not recognize the state as an agent that feels the effect of law breaking. It holds the notion that actions of offenders
...Download file to see next pagesRead More
In America, there is no single criminal justice system but several similar, independent systems. The criminal justice system is dependent on the jurisdiction in charge that can be tribal government, county, city, state or military facility. The government has always been committed to rebalance and reform the country’s criminal justice system for purposes of delivering justice for all citizens, and to safeguard the victim’s interests, communities and witnesses.
22). However, Canada faces a health crisis due to overcrowding of hospitals, aging population that must be cared for, and shortage of medical personnel (Campbell 2002, p. 22). These challenges pose a substantial threat to the high standards of Medicare that Canadians boast of, and unless it is fixed immediately and effectively, then Canada will face a health crisis.
The judicial system is crucial in a country as it facilitates the application of justice in the society, and it helps punish the law breakers. Verdicts passed by the jury, or the judge over a criminal activity should be consistent with the applicable elements of the law with regard to the offense committed by the culprit.
There are different perspectives through which this development may be studied; this essay shall briefly state them and take the Revisionists' Interpretation of History to discuss its various aspects, while stating why this particular perspective appeals to this student, more than others.
Supreme Court normally functions based on the guidelines, passed by the Congress. Under normal circumstances, Supreme Court hears cases which were unresolved in trail courts, appellate courts and state courts. Most of the cases appear in
Teams are a specialized form of groups. In any case, group dynamics play an important role in the management of groups since groups differ in their attributes. Managers may use groups in order to gauge performance, enhance customer responsiveness, and boost
The author explains that the three major legislations form the basis of the Canadian Criminal Justice System. Equity, fairness and transparency are some of the attributes that the system advocates the Northern American country. In addition, it encourages all citizens to be law abiding people.
However, the multi-layer system has been critically challenged because it does not foster an equitable distribution of resources. The United States have been urged to follow the example of Canada that has maintained a single-tier health care system.
The jury found Casey not guilty of either first degree murder or manslaughter. She was instead found “guilty on four counts of providing false information to law enforcement, which are misdemeanors” (Hopper, Friedman and De Nies 1). Casey might just serve one and a half years in prison since she already served two years and the maximum sentence applicable for her case is four years.
2 Pages(500 words)Essay
GOT A TRICKY QUESTION? RECEIVE AN ANSWER FROM STUDENTS LIKE YOU!
Save Your Time for More Important Things
Let us write or edit the essay on your topic
"Analysis & Critique of Canadian Court System"
with a personal 20% discount.