In the criminal justice procedure it is often one party against another. In most cases it is the offender against a victim and both parties have their own rights. In the criminal justice procedure, the victim is often the underlying party in the criminal justice system. The rights of the victim are not that strong as the rights of the offender. But for only 40 years ago, there were not even rights for victims. Crime victims were the forgotten party in criminal justice proceedings, whose only function was to serve as witnesses and informants. Nowadays this is no longer the case. From the 1980s onwards, various national and international legal instruments were adopted with the aim of furthering and developing the rights of victims and to improve …show more content…
Substantive criminal law defines certain behaviour as illegal. Substantive criminal law does not only define certain illegal behaviour but it also determines the appropriate punishment for such behaviour. This is all written down in the Criminal Code. The Criminal Code contains the descriptions of specific crimes like murder, manslaughter, rape and more. Procedural criminal law defines the procedures by which substantive criminal law can be enforced. The court procedures, rules of evidence and more are written down in the Code of Criminal Procedure. In the criminal justice system there are a lot of different angles on how to view justice. There are three generally known types of justice which need to be considered in the criminal law: retributive, procedural and restorative justice. Retributive justice is a part of the criminal justice system which is based on the punishment of offenders rather than on rehabilitation. Procedural justice is the idea of fairness and respect to the victim during a trial. There are three core elements which are important in procedural justice. Victims deserve a respectful treatment, information and support and participation. This paper will be focused on restorative justice. The restorative justice theory has increasingly emerged as an influential world-wide alternative to criminal justice practice over the past 35 years (Centre for Justice & Reconciliation, …show more content…
(3) The responsibility of the government is to maintain order and of the community to build peace (Centre for Justice & Reconciliation, n.d.)
The criminal justice systems vary in each country as far as their policies and procedures go. Each aspect of the criminal justice system has its advantages and disadvantages. The main purpose of the criminal justice system is to sanction criminals, mitigate crime, increase security and uphold a fair system of justice. In some cultures, fairness is not always given as certain laws are expected to be honored. This paper will discuss the criminal justice system in the United States, England and Japan.
Criminal law attempts to balance the rights of individuals to freedom from interference with person or property, and society’s need for order. Procedural matters, the rights of citizens and powers of the state, specific offences and defences, and punishment and compensation are some of the ways society and the criminal justice system interact.
I take into consideration that instead of authorizing the state or professional to ratify and speak their mind, the most relevance to a case the court should take into consideration of what the victim seems fit as a fair punishment or payment in forms of restitution, whether it is labor or monetary to then go along with the judge 's sentence. “The Charter, apart from other things, sets forth that the victim should enjoy the same rights as the culprit. But it is not enough to put this in writing, the law has to be changed in such a way that the victim is not only not deprived of his say, but has rights at least equal to those enjoyed by the accused”. I agree with the previous quote due to the fact that victims should not be deprived from speech and equality. I believe that by having the original parties engaged rather than being driven to the side, society will be more concerned to make sure that everyone is given fair, equal and consistent resolution to a conflict. This would establish that the neighbourhood and state have a set of shared values and goals that they are working towards to support social order. “At present, the role of a victim of a crime is only at the periphery of the criminal justice delivery system. Once the first information is furnished, the only stage at which the victim comes into the picture is when she is called upon to give evidence in court by the prosecution. The victim virtually
Zehr (1990) who is thought to be one of the pioneers leading the argument for restorative justice highlighted three questions presented when taking a restorative approach; what is the nature of the harm resulting from the crime? What needs to be done to make things right or repair the harm? Who is responsible for this repair? He ascertained that ‘crime is fundamentally a violation of people and interpersonal relationships’. He also noted that violations create obligations and liabilities and that restorative justice seeks to heal and put right the wrongs. Restorative jus...
Restorative justice can be defined as a theory related to justice that is concerned on repairing the harm that is caused or revealed by a criminal behavior (Barsh 2005: 359). Over the years, restorative justice has been seen as an effective way of dealing with both social as well as cultural issues of the aboriginal people. Because of these, restorative justice is used in many of the local communities in an effort to correct criminal behavior. This concept is seen as a conceptualization of justice which is in most cases congruent with the cultural and the community values of the aboriginal people. There is growing body of evidence which suggests that there are a number of challenges which accrue the effective implementation of restorative justice amongst the aboriginal people.
The symbol of the Canadian judicial system is the balanced scales of justice. When a wrongful act is committed, the scales of justice are greatly misplaced and require a solution to counterbalance the crime and restore balance. Additionally, the scales represent the idea that law should be viewed objectively and the determination of innocence should be made without bias. The Canadian criminal justice system encapsulates the idea of the scale of justice, to control crime and impose penalties on those who violate the law. One of the most important aspects of this system is that an individual charged with a criminal offence is presumed innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. The current system has two prevailing methods involved in the process of dealing with crime: Retributive and restorative justice. This paper will analyze aspects of retributive justice and restorative justice, with reference to their respective philosophies, for the purpose of finding which is more effective at achieving justice and maintaining balance.
Restorative Justice is a system centred on reparative aspects rather than only punitive ones. Indeed, the crime should be fixed, not just punished. It has become progressively more popular over the years and its apparition can be explained from the failures of the traditional models of criminal justice. The actual criminal justice system has more than proved the problems it raises and its inefficiency in a number of matters: “We have never resolved the equation of punishment and retribution on one side and reformation on the other. I seriously doubt we ever will” . Therefore a balance between a rehabilitating system and a punitive system need to be struck, a system which would have both fairness in punishment and effectiveness in stopping reoffending.
In fact, restorative justice system response to wrongdoing that emphasizes healing the wounds of victims, offenders, and communities caused or revealed by crime (Schmalleger & Smykla, 2014, p.62). The main goal here is to establish a form of boundaries when it comes to the level and extent of punishment. Non one here on earth is allowed to just display deviant criminal behavior without some form of discipline and/or punishment. Furthermore, for those whom display criminal behavior disrupts the community as well. In addition deterrence is another key factor in the goals of punishment and the efforts to make it back right. Exploring further along to where restoration of the justice system have and still is occurring in today’s
In the formal criminal justice process one has to undergo many steps before they can be released. There are two phases that one must endure before arrest they are the initial contact where a police officer observes, hears, or responds to criminal activity. The other is the investigation process where it is the burden of the police to find sufficient evidence to support a legal arrest. Once a person is arrested the police needs to have a probable cause for arresting the individual. Then the officer arrests the individual denying the individual their freedom. Second the officer takes the criminal into custody this is where an officer may want to search for more evidence or interrogate a person. Third, the individual will
What is retributive justice? It is a system of criminal justice based on the punishment of offenders rather than rehabilitation. According to our notes, it is the oldest sense of the word justice. Others think of it as “an eye for an eye” or “getting even”. Justice should be more than getting even for crimes and offenses. Retributive justifications of punishments have largely endured the test of time.
Generally, the study of crime mainly focused on the offender until quite recently. In fact, Shapland et al (1985) described the victim as ‘the forgotten man’ of the criminal justice system and ‘the non-person in the eyes of the professional participants’. A new perspective was brought with victimology, an expanding sub-discipline of crimin...
Agreeing on a definition of restorative justice has proved difficult. One definition is a theory of justice that focuses mostly on repairing the harm caused by criminal behaviour. The reparation is done through a cooperative process that includes all the stakeholders. Restorative justice can also be explained as an approach of justice that aims to satisfy the needs of the victims and offenders, as well as the entire community. The most broadly accepted definition for restorative justice, however, is a process whereby all the parties that have a stake in a specific offence collectively resolve on how to deal with the aftermath. This process is largely focused around reparation, reintegration and participation of victims. That is to say, it is a victim-centred approach to criminal justice, and it perceives crime differently than the adversarial system of justice.
Its foundation is a range of mechanism and processes that are characterized into two categories, retributive and restorative justices; to provide form reparation for the victims of human right abuses and to construct punishments for individuals or groups for the crimes that were committed during the process of transition. There are five “core principles” of transitional justice are; trials, truth commissions, reparations, lustrations and amnesties. These mechanisms are implemented to accomplish the state’s obligations to investigate, prosecute and punish individuals, to seek the truth, to aide victim with reparations and to reform abusive institutions. Within in the last decades, transitional justice as method has evolved essentially and it’s considered the principle to the processes of transition to democracy and peace and the answer to national conflict. Thus, political leaders seek the installation of these temporary mechanisms to challenge past violations and to help restore legitimate legal systems and democratic
takes account of the victims and the community effected by the offence. Restorative justice measures
Laws serve several purposes in the criminal justice system. The main purpose of criminal law is to protect, serve, and limit human actions and to help guide human conduct. Also, laws provide penalties and punishment against those who are guilty of committing crimes against property or persons. In the modern world, there are three choices in dealing with criminals’ namely criminal punishment, private action and executive control. Although both private action and executive control are advantageous in terms of costs and speed, they present big dangers that discourage their use unless in exceptional situations. The second purpose of criminal law is to punish the offender. Punishing the offender is the most important purpose of criminal law since by doing so; it discourages him from committing crime again while making him or her pay for their crimes. Retribution does not mean inflicting physical punishment by incarceration only, but it also may include things like rehabilitation and financial retribution among other things. The last purpose of criminal law is to protect the community from criminals. Criminal law acts as the means through which the society protects itself from those who are harmful or dangerous to it. This is achieved through sentences meant to act as a way of deterring the offender from repeating the same crime in the future.