The Protection of the Accused from Miscarriage of Justice

1997 ◽  
Vol 31 (1-3) ◽  
pp. 590-611
Author(s):  
A.A.S. Zuckerman
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Criminal Justice System ◽  
Small Proportion ◽  
Justice System ◽  
Criminal Responsibility ◽  
Criminal Trial ◽  
Large Measure ◽  
The Public ◽  
Miscarriage Of Justice

The criminal trial system is regarded as standing at the pinnacle of the state's machinery for dealing with crime. But the courts deal with only a small proportion of crimes committed. Their function is more indirect: to express societal disapproval through a public and somewhat theatrical show. This is not to denigrate the role of the courts or dismiss it as futile. The criminal trial does have important functions in the development of norms for criminal responsibility and in fostering respect for the law. But its success in this regard hinges on the extent to which it is perceived as a just and effective method for dealing with those charged with crime. Put crudely, the success of the criminal justice system turns in large measure in the success of the show it puts on. But theatre is good only for as long as it is able to carry the audience with it, which, in the case of the courts, this means as long as the public is prepared to accept their verdicts at face value.

scholarly journals The Role of Judges in Guaranteeing Legal Certainty and Justice: An Analysis to the Application of Judicial Independence Principle in Criminal Cases in Indonesia

2019 ◽  
Vol 3 ◽  
pp. 201-209
Author(s):  
Vivi Ariyanti
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Criminal Justice System ◽  
Justice System ◽  
Judicial Independence ◽  
The State ◽  
Legal Certainty ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
The Public ◽  
Independence Principle

The duty and obligation of a state based on law is to provide protection for the public from all possible crimes, so that the state has a role in conducting prevention and repression of crime, and this cannot be separated from the implementation of criminal law by the state, as a tool to protect the public. The authority of the state to provide criminal sanctions is then delegated to law enforcement officers working in a system known as the Criminal Justice System. The criminal justice system itself is strongly influenced by the community environment and the field of human life. Therefore, the criminal justice system will always experience interaction, interconnection, and interdependence with its environment and sub-systems of the criminal justice system itself. One of the supporting sub-systems that have a very important role in implementing the criminal justice system is the court, which contains judges who are authorized by law to adjudicate. Judges in their capacity as authorities in the legal field have freedom as a form of independence in carrying out their duties. This independence does not mean that judges are freed from all obligations and responsibilities, but the independence of judges has the meaning of their existence as bearers of moral responsibility for upholding justice. This paper discusses the role of judges in ensuring legal certainty and justice in society, especially in handling criminal cases. This paper uses normative and philosophical analysis to the application of judicial independence principle in adjudicating criminal cases in the Indonesian criminal justice system.

scholarly journals role of the public prosecutor in the United States

2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. 253-263
Author(s):  
Michael C. Kovac
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Criminal Justice System ◽  
Justice System ◽  
Case Law ◽  
The United States ◽  
Public Prosecutor ◽  
Common Goal ◽  
The Public

Prosecutors in the United States play multifaceted roles in their criminal justice system. They provide guidance during the investigative stages of cases, lead the prosecution of cases in the country’s adversarial proceedings, police their own profession, and lead legislative efforts aimed at making the system more just for all involved. There are separate prosecuting offices for the separate sovereignties located within the countries. Statutes, constitutions, and case law establish the rights and duties of those separate offices. All prosecuting offices in the United States share the pursuit of justice as their common goal.

Reforming the criminal justice system – an ethical leadership approach

2017 ◽  
Vol 13 (2) ◽  
pp. 64-75 ◽  
Author(s):  
Verl Anderson ◽  
Riki Ichiho
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Criminal Justice System ◽  
Ethical Leadership ◽  
Justice System ◽  
Ethical Issues ◽  
Content Type ◽  
The Public ◽  
Moral Perspective ◽  
Conceptual Paper ◽  
Practical Implications

Purpose The current criminal justice system is pledged to serve and protect society while preserving the rights of those who are accused. The purpose of this paper is to explore the premise of “innocent until proven guilty” and examine whether this assumption truly prevails under the current criminal justice system, or be modified to accommodate a sliding continuum of virtuosity. Design/methodology/approach This paper is a conceptual paper which relies heavily on the current literature about criminal justice and related ethical issues. Findings The paper argues that today’s criminal justice system fails to meet the standards of the virtuous continuum and that those who oversee that system need to rethink how the system operates and is perceived by the public if they wish the criminal justice system to be perceived as just, fair, and ethically responsible. Research limitations/implications Because this paper is a conceptual paper it does not present research hypotheses. Practical implications This paper suggests that “virtue” and “ethics” must be the foundation upon which the criminal justice system is evaluated, and criminal justice must incorporate an ethical standard which is virtuous and fair to all parties and leaders who oversee that system must meet the standards suggested by the virtuous continuum. Originality/value This paper is among the first to identify the viewpoint of the virtuous perspective, moral perspective, amoral perspective, and immoral perspective in the criminal justice system.

scholarly journals PERANAN KEJAKSAAN REPUBLIK INDONESIA DALAM PEMBERANTASAN KORUPSI DI NEGARA DEMOKRASI (Role of The Attorney General of Indonesia in Eradicating Corruption in State Democracy)

2016 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
pp. 15
Author(s):  
Suharyo Suharyo
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Criminal Justice System ◽  
Justice System ◽  
Good Governance ◽  
Attorney General ◽  
Strong Relationship ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Local Officials ◽  
Strategic Position

PERANAN KEJAKSAAN REPUBLIK INDONESIADALAM PEMBERANTASAN KORUPSI DI NEGARA DEMOKRASI(Role of The Attorney General of Indonesia in Eradicating Corruption in State Democracy) The Attorney General of Indonesia plays a strategic position in corruption eradication. Since IndonesiaIndependent Day on 17 August 1945 until now, the attorney general keeps eradicate the corruption. As one of the elements of criminal justice system of the democracy state refers to the Act No.16/2004 on the Attorney General of Republic of Indonesia, and also a concern with the Act No.8/1981 on the Criminal Code (KUHAP). Corruption eradication is ruled and stipulated on the Act No.31/1999 on Corruption Eradication Jo the Act No.20/2001, and supported the Act No.8/2010 on the Criminal Act of Money Laundering . Questions of this research were what obstacles of corruption eradication in attorneys and how to make it effective? It was a normative-juridical method. It was  an impression that the Attorney General has no dare to enforce the law for the elite politician, local officials (governors,majors) because of their strong relationship with. This phenomenon triggered scholars to do long march and protest to the Attorney General to be consistent and responsive in corruption eradication. Good governance and bureaucracy reform had no big impact, the meaning of “Tri Atmaka” and “Tri Karma Adhyaksa” had truly not been absorbed and practiced, yet. Keywords: The Attorney General of Indonesia in eradicating corruption ABSTRAK Kejaksaan Republik Indonesia memegang posisi sangat strategis dalam pemberantasan korupsi. SejakProklamasi Kemerdekaan 17 Agustus 1945 sampai sekarang, Kejaksaan Republik Indonesia terus menerus melakukan pemberantasan korupsi. Sebagai salah satu unsur dari  sistem peradilan pidana (Criminal Justice System) di dalam negara demokrasi Kejaksaan RI mengacu pada Undang-Undang Nomor 16 Tahun 2004 Tentang Kejaksaan RI, dan juga memperhatikan Undang-Undang Nomor 8 Tahun 1981 tentang Hukum Acara Pidana (KUHAP). Khusus untuk pemberantasan korupsi, diatur melalui Undang-Undang Nomor 31 Tahun 1999 tentang Pemberantasan Tidak Pidana Korupsi no Undang-Undang Nomor 20 Tahun 2001, dan ditunjang Undang-Undang Nomor 8 Tahun 2010 Tentang Tindak Pidana Pencucian Uang. Adapun rumusan masalah dalam penelitian ini adalah apakah kendala yang melekat jajaran Kejaksaan dalam pemberantasan korupsi, serta Bagaimana mengefektifkan Kejaksaan RI dalam pemberantasan korupsi. Metode yang dipakai adalah yuridis normatif.Terdapat kesan, Kejaksaan RI sangat tumpul pada pelaku dari elit politik, dan pejabat daerah (Gubernur, Bupati/Walikota) yang mempunyai koneksi politik yang kuat.Sehingga tidaklah mengherankan, apabila di berbagai daerah, muncul aksi-aksi unjuk rasa dari kalangan mahasiswa yang menuntut Kejaksaan RI agar konsisten dan responsif dalam pemberantasan korupsi. Good Governance dan reformasi birokrasi, hanya berpengaruh positif, secara minimal. Makna Tri Atmaka, serta Tri Karma Adhyaksa, kurang diresapi dan kurang  diamalkan secara mendalam. Kata Kunci: Kejaksaan RI dalam pemberantasan korupsi

Efficiency and effectiveness of the penitentiary system: assessment and planning

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Valeriy Terehin ◽  
Viktor Chernyshov
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Criminal Justice System ◽  
Justice System ◽  
Economic Losses ◽  
Educational Institutions ◽  
Penal System ◽  
Law Enforcement Agencies ◽  
Predictive Values ◽  
The Public ◽  
Efficiency And Effectiveness

The issues of setting goals, planning and forming a system of indicators of the effectiveness and efficiency of the penal system are considered. The criteria for determining the goals-tasks that are adequate to the public goals of the system are justified. Quantitative indicators corresponding to the criteria were developed, based on the contribution of the criminal justice System to reducing the socio-economic losses of society from recidivism. The contribution of the system is determined by changes in the criminal potential of convicted persons during the period of serving a sentence under a court sentence. Criminal potentials are estimated by predictive values of the aggregate of three groups of characteristics of the criminal potential of convicts, determined by the stages of the cycle of recidivism. The practical results of the use of sound methods and developed tools are based on the use of a significant amount of empirical data on the institutions of the criminal justice system and its systematic expert and statistical analysis. The monograph is a generalization and development of the works carried out by the authors during 2012-2017 in the process of preparing masters of Management for the penal system. It is intended for managers and specialists of the bodies and institutions of the Criminal Justice System, researchers, teachers of higher educational institutions who train specialists for law enforcement agencies.

Non-criminal dispute resolution in South Africa’s criminal justice system: Proposals for reform

2020 ◽  
Vol 33 (3) ◽  
pp. 646-669
Author(s):  
Navilla Somaru ◽  
Christa Rautenbach
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Criminal Justice System ◽  
Dispute Resolution ◽  
Justice System ◽  
Public Domain ◽  
The Public ◽  
As If

The National Prosecuting Authority has issued a comprehensive document containing policy directives that are available only to prosecutors. This document makes provision for non-criminal dispute resolution mechanisms in the form of diversions and informal mediations where the offender is an adult. It seems as if a large number of less severe cases are disposed of in this way every year. The directives are not in the public domain, and their scope and application are shrouded in a cloud of secrecy. This contribution analyses the alternative dispute mechanisms of diversion and informal mediation available to prosecutors, which are referred to as non-criminal dispute resolution mechanisms, with the aim to propose ways to effect reform in this area.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document