The Organization of Lawyers and Judges - Assignment Example

Lay judges work together to decide upon whether or not there is sufficient evidence for a defendant to be sent to be tried at a higher court. They also settle some matters involving family law. (Clark, 1992). In Germany, laypeople serve as judges in the commercial and criminal sections of state district courts. Serving on a panel of two or three, they work for a fixed term and are paid for their services. While in other countries, lay judges are only used at lower court levels, in Germany they are also used in the appellate Federal Labor Court and the Federal Social Security Court.

In these instances, they serve in a mixed tribunal, where professional judges constitute the majority. (Clark, 1992). France uses laypeople to a great degree in a series of specialized tribunals. Commercial hearings involve the use of businesspeople elected by their peers, who serve for an initial two-year term and then up to four more four-year terms. Cases involving labor disputes make use of five groups of laypeople that represent the five sections of the economy. Each group is made up of the same number of people, and within each group, there is the same number of employee representatives and employer representatives.

These laypeople are elected to serve a term of six years. Similarly, social security cases involve the use of one employee representative and one employer representative; these laypeople are chosen by organizations to serve a five-year term. Cases involving rural leases use two representatives of farm leasers and two elected representatives of farm lessees that are elected to serve a term of six years. In all of the aforementioned specialized tribunals, laypeople are not paid for their services.

(Clark, 1992). Historically, socialist countries such as China have used laypeople to quite an extensive degree. China used to use a large number of lay judges elected by residents to serve alongside professional judges. In the last couple of decades, however, the use of judges has become more professionalized; fewer and fewer laypeople are being used. Many cases are now being determined by a single judge, which gets rid of the need for laypeople. (Clark, 1992). In Japan, on the other hand, laypeople are being used to an even greater extent than ever.

Beginning in May 2009, jury duty for laypeople will sometimes include cases that involve the death penalty. (Peters, 2008). In contrast to Japan giving weighty decisions to laypeople, Saudi Arabia barely uses laypeople. Based on the highly religious Sharia (Islamic Law), laypeople are not considered to understand Sharia; nor is this sort of material made easily accessible to them. In addition, many people in Saudi Arabia are illiterate. The scant use of laypeople in Saudi Arabia has led to much corruption in the courts there.

(Human Rights Watch, 2008). While the United States sometimes uses fines as punishments for minor offenses, this is much more commonly done in Western Europe where it is also used for major criminal offenses. Judges in the United States have faced difficulty punishing criminals with fines that are fair in terms of what they did and what their economic situation is like. In Western Europe, however, day fines are used.