Transcendental vs Evolutionary Law Models - Essay Example

LAW AND SOCIETY affiliation Criminal justice is ified into two main models by Herbert Packer: the conflict model and the model of consensus. The model of consensus, which is also known as the system perspective, states that a society of a criminal justice should work or be in operation. The model of conflict, also known as the non-perspective model, assumes the organization of criminal justice should compete for it to survive. The crime control model is a liberal approach to criminal justice while the due process is a more conservative approach to crime control. Natural law means the ethical imperatives that are supposedly inherent to human beings and are started by human reason. Natural law is based on the independence of supernatural considerations and natural foundations. Natural law has two perspectives: the transcendental and evolutionary. The essay aims to describe the differences between the two models of justice and the difference between transcendental and evolutionary law. Differences between the due process and crime control models of criminal justice The due process was developed to ensure that individuals had their rights and freedoms portrayed and that they had a fair trial in defending themselves in the court. The crime control method, was however, implemented to ensure that weak cases were finished up easily and discarded as soon as possible; the model ensures that bigger cases, which are important, would get more attention from the courts thus an earlier conviction (Dautrich and Yalof, 2012). The due process aims to ensure that a person in any contact with a criminal agency cannot have his/her rights refused minus the appropriate applicable legal measures. The basis of this model is that a person has some fundamental rights that are needed to be upheld by a criminal agency. The model has less faith in the justice system compared to the crime control method. However, the model is useful because it controls the forcible powers of the agencies; and if there is an error or mistake, the accused can defend them. Thus, the principal aim of the model is to create a system that the accused is assumed innocent until his/her guilt is proven by the court of law (Dautrich and Yalof 2012). The crime control model condemns a person for performing an action which is perceived to be criminal. The model prioritizes the conviction of individuals who have committed a crime yet they do not want the court system to decide them. The model is focused on conviction and innocent individuals may end up being convicted for the model to achieve its goal. The model comprises of some assumptions: justification of rights for the victimized, heavy dependence on the prosecutorial events and the deduction of guilt (Kraska 2004). The crime model is a conservative approach to criminal justice and emphases on protecting the society from individuals from crooks by regulating the criminal justice and conduct. The due process, meanwhile, is a more liberal approach and favors the rights of the criminals (Griffiths, 1970). The sue process aims to protect both the society and the criminal. The model operates under the tenet and the defendant is always assumed to be innocent unless the courts prove otherwise. The crime control method stresses on swift and strict punishment for criminals; the strict measures are aimed at keeping the society safe from crime by instilling fear into the criminals. The goal of the model is to lessen crime by making individuals scared of the consequences associated with criminal activities. The due process model, however, is more lenient on individuals who engage in crime. The model advocates for a thorough criminal justice system, which favors the criminal more. It aims to bring the offenders back to the society after serving their terms and help them blend back easily. The due process was developed mainly to enable criminals who are willing to change their ways adapt into the society after their sentences. Both models are efficient and essential to reducing and tackling crime. They both aim to tackle crime and punish the individuals who committed the heinous acts. However, their individual approach to how the crime is tackled is contradicting. The crime control method assumes a person is guilty until he/she is proven innocent while the due process assumes an individual to be innocent until they are proved otherwise by the courts (Kent, 1999). The due process believes that policing forms the basis of maintaining justice in the society. However, the crime control model does not advocate for the same. It believes that the process of arresting individuals drags the process of criminal justice. The crime control model was developed to arrest and convict, and it mainly works as shoot first- ask questions later. The crime control model considers the rights of a defendant as too expensive and that it would cost the system a lot of resources, both financially and time. According to the model, the resources are better diverted to other meaningful sectors, like the police recruitment. The due process, meanwhile, lays an emphasis on the provision of the basic human rights, regardless of associated costs (Travis III, 2008). The differences between transcendental natural law and evolutionary natural law Transcendental law is universalistic and timeless; and it applies across all societies and cultures. Transcendental laws are viewed as universal and they should apply to every individual, regardless of their background. The laws are assumed to be ultimate and when the human law contradicts it, transcendental law should be followed instead; it is considered as a law within a law (Kessler, 1944). Evolutionary law attempts to explain how law from human generations and as being the reason it is referred to as natural. Evolutionary law is limited in application and they differ with regions, culture and generations. They are modified according to the situation. Transcendental law runs down from families through education and jurisprudence. The law is unchanged from the time it was implemented. It acts like an unwritten law or constitution, which its contents are not to be changed or modified. This is unlike the evolutionary law which changes with the existing situations and environment. Evolutionary law is more dynamic than transcendental and is more prone to adjustments. Its flexibility is an advantage because it makes it more applicable in different cases and situations. Conclusion There are major differences between the crime control model and the due process. Both models aim to control and deter criminal activities in the society, albeit with different approaches. The crime control model is more liberal in its approach; giving the accused individuals limited options. The accused is assumed guilty until he/ she is proved innocent by the courts. Moreover, the model aims at convicting the criminals rather than reforming them. It targets to only protect the society from criminals. The due process is more conservative in its approach, giving the criminal more rights and freedoms. According to the due model, an individual is assumed innocent unless proved guilty. It mainly aims at rehabilitating the criminal rather than convicting them. The due process aims to protect the criminal and the society. Transcendental law is static compared to evolutionary law. It rarely changes and it is passed from generations in the same format. Evolutionary law changes according to the generation, age or situation and it is altered for it to suit the present situation. References Dautrich, K., & Yalof, D. A. (2012). American government: Historical, popular, and global perspectives: brief version. Boston, MA: Wadsworth Cengage Learning. Griffiths, J. (1970). Ideology in Criminal Procedure, Yale Law School Faculty Scholarship, 1(1), 5-17. Travis III, L. (2008). Introduction to Criminal Justice, Burlington: Elsevier Science. Kent, R. (1999). Four Models of the Criminal System, Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, 89(2), 4-28. Kessler, F. (1944). Natural Law, Justice and Democracy, Some Reflections on Three Types of Thinking about Law and Justice, Yale Law School Faculty Scholarship, 1(1), 1-31 Kraska, P.B. (2004). Theorizing criminal justice: Eight essential orientations. Long Grove, IL: Waveland Press, Inc. Read More