The Role of the Judiciary in the Pursuit - Research Paper Example

? The Judiciary The Judiciary Introduction The purpose of this study is to show the role of the judiciary in the pursuit and implementation of social justice in the society. As a branch of the criminal justice system, the study uses the hypothesis that professionals in the field of legal affairs such as lawyers, judges and advocates can use the principles of social justice, such as solidarity, human rights and freedoms, fairness and equality to promote justice in the contemporary society. With the claim in the statement remaining so strong, the study emphasizes on the manifestation and the indicator of social justice. The professionals in the field of legal issues apparently are the only solution providers in the matters of justice, yet at the same time, they happen to be perpetrators or participants in the cases of injustice (Dignan, 2004). This has happened according to various incidents, where the professionals either compromise their integrity against the justice system as a result of security threats to their lives or deliberate compromise because corrupt deals. PART I Professionals working in the judiciary such as judges, court prosecutors, attorneys and friends of the courts are under obligations to ensure that they execute justice in every case through implementation, defense and upholding of the law in full view of ethical standards. This implies that they should be the ambassadors of transparency rather than being the perpetrators or the promoters of injustices in the society. The court and the entire community expect them to apply the constitution impartially and without favoring any side of the case. Social justice as covered in the Constitution of the United States discusses the application of the required ethical standards in the respect the constitution accords to human rights to life. In this, the constitution shows equal protection to every member of the society including the recognition of the children’s rights. The application of this section of the constitution is relevant in the sense that even the neighborhoods of every residential area has the right to involve law enforcers incase of suspicion of any harmful sequences in certain families facing domestic struggles. At the same time, the constitution deems a person innocent until the court receives sufficient irrevocable evidences from witnesses to use for ruling on the cases. In the two scenarios and in similar incidents, there is a critical test on the ethical standards among the legal professionals working in the judiciary. The only way to uphold the constitution is by reading the relevant parts as are applicable to every case and avoiding misinterpretation. Secondly, they can consult with the attorneys of the judicial system before deciding on controversial or weighty issues. The professional working in the judiciary can make use of the principles of social justices of equality to give both the prosecution and the defense sufficient hearing and at the same time, equal chances to present evidences. The defense must also have the right to appeal in case the decision does not favor him or her. Elkana, Szigete and Lissauer (2011) argues that it is the mandate of the court system and the justice system to promote and to protect solidarity among the professionals in the judicial services as well as the civil society members (the Civil Right Revolutionists), as a way to uphold human rights within the cover of the constitution. A just society will only be just if it articulates and upholds the rights of the citizens of the country. Part II: Several theories exist to explain the reasons why people decide to commit crime. One of the theories referred to as the Strain theory holds that there is a structural constrain that arises among members of the society undergoing development and tends to hinder individual members from achieving their dreams and ambitions in life. These are the strains that push the person into unrealistic means of achieving the same goals leading to criminal acts (Gerber & Jensen, 2007). The second theory is referred to as the Differential involvement or association. This theory explains that the society has a way of building up criminals either deliberately or unknowingly (Swanson & Talarico, 1987). This is because the society interacts with well identified criminals but decides to remain silent about the fact. In the process, even the innocent members of the society begin to learn the criminal ideologies from them and live to practice them in criminal acts. The third theory is referred to as the Anomie theory. This theory explains the reasons for mass movement against plaid down principles, as a result of discontent especially in the process of industrial development. It leads to a form of rebellion against the guiding principles of society, where the manners of the society members suffer anomalies (Franzese, 2009). In this regard, the criminals are simply considered as victims of society who are suffering from consequences of inefficient systems, not as rebels. A good example is in industrial boycotts and strikes. The judiciary can use the understanding of the theories to assist in the prevention of criminal activities even before they occur. In the study of the sequences of criminal indicators presented by the theories, intelligent analysis will enable the judiciary to identify potential criminals and take relevant actions. It can also realize the weaknesses with the judicial system to assist in the reforms that can improve the efficiency of the judicial system. As a result of the causes or factors leading to criminal acts, the judiciary can develop various preventive and corrective measures against crime that are relevant to the contemporary society. For example, depending on the magnitude of the crime, certain criminal convicts are best suited for rehabilitations to develop character. The judiciary realizes the need to avoid corruption and handle criminal acts transparently and constitutionally. The theories, especially the Differential involvement theory expose the dire consequences of ignoring crime or none-conformity to the constitutional requirement. The greatest contribution of the theories to the judiciary professionals is through the implementations of judicial reforms. This is because it indicates to the weak areas of the system of social justice and the treatment of crime in the society. It shifts the focus of the professionals away from personal interests to the key indicators of the weaknesses that require reforms. The theories also help a lot in the providing guidance to the judiciary system and the judiciary professionals, because they provide effective hypothesis that guide their explanations. These hypothesis found in the theories contain specific variables that actually guide the theories, and these variables are what in turn also guide the judiciary professionals. In any profession or system, there must be theories related to that system or profession, and these theories help a lot in explaining various concepts related to that specific profession or system in the society. Part III: On the regular basis, the judiciary faces issues that affect its performance towards the negative direction. One of the issues is with regards to change of regimes. Whenever a new government comes into office, the judiciary faces a lot of movement of the senior members from one position to another. While this assists in transparent job rotation, it displaces certain expertise from their rightful positions and eliminates the level of specialization that the judicial system is in dire need of. Secondly, the judiciary faces the issue of understaffing. Considering the number of cases that are presented before the court on regular basis, the work load continues to build to level that overwhelm the judicial teams (Fox & Stephenson, 2011). This is made worse by the time limits that the judiciary has for every case. The judiciary also faces accusations from the discontented members of the society whose cases have not been favorable. This is inevitable as Cortina (2000) explains that every case has to favor either the defense or the prosecution but not both. As Montinola and Jackman (2002) points out, members of the society at times have pushed sections of the judiciary to the points of compromising and getting involved in corrupt rulings of cases, either by threatening their lives or by enticing them into corruption. Conclusion As stated in the hypothesis of the study, the professionals in the judicial systems can be the leading parties in the promotion of social justice according to the expectation of the constitution. The judicial system ought to act as a servant to the rest of the citizens of a country and assure them of justice. Cases of corruption and unethical behaviors lead to situations where the society looses confidence with the judicial system and worsens the position of the social justice. This is because the society members become defiant and take laws into their hands. Literally, ethics is the driving force of the judicial system if the judiciary is ever to win the confidence of the society. Again, the judicial system can lead the process through a critical and intelligent study of the theories about the potential causes of crime. This can enable the law enforcers to contribute to the social justice by applying intelligence in curbing criminal acts and secure the justice of the society. References Cortina, A. (2000). Civil ethics and the validity of law. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice, 3 (1), 39-55. Dignan, J. (2004). Understanding victims and restorative justice. Columbus, OH: McGraw-Hill Professional Publishing. Elkana, Y., Szigete, A., & Lissauer, G. (2011). Concepts and the social order: Robert K. Merton and the future of sociology. Budapest, Hungary: Central European University Press. Fox, J., & Stephenson, M. C. (2011). Judicial review as a response to political posturing. The American Political Science Review, 105 (2), 397-414. Franzese, R. J. (2009). The sociology of deviance: Differences, tradition, and stigma. Springfield, IL: Charles C. Thomas Publishers, Limited. Gerber, J., & Jensen, E. L. (2007). Encyclopedia of white-collar crime. California: GPG. Montinola, G. R., & Jackman, R. W. (2002). Sources of corruption: A cross-country study. British Journal of Political Science, 32, 147-170. Swanson, C. R., & Talarico, S. M. (1987). Court administration. Athens: University of Georgia. Read More