scholarly journals The Criminal Justice System as Enablement for Social Order in Nigeria

2019 ◽  
Vol 17 (1) ◽  
pp. 72-86
Author(s):  
Darlington Iwarimie-Jaja ◽  
Raimi Lasisi
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Criminal Justice System ◽  
Social Order ◽  
Justice System ◽  
Data Gathering ◽  
Complementary Method ◽  
The People ◽  
Content Analysis Method ◽  
The Rich ◽  
The Government

The place of the Criminal Justice System (CJS) in ensuring and sustaining social order in any country has been long established especially with the understanding that norms, rules, and laws act as social adhesives for society. However, some countries in the developing world seem to be grappling with significant challenges associated with criminal justice delivery as a consequence of the real and perceived inefficiency of the CJS in dealing with deviant issues. This to a large extent tend to undermine social order and by extension the collective conscience of the people. In Nigeria, criminal justice issues have attracted strong theoretical and practical affronts with the dominant perspective being that the poor are often denied justice in favour of the rich with adverse implications for social order. As a result, this paper examined the issue of the CJS in order to show how this affects social order in Nigeria. The paper adopts the content analysis method for data gathering and the qualitative approach to data analysis. Also, the Marxist Political Economy perspective is adopted as the theoretical framework as well as a complementary method of analysis. The paper submits that in a society like Nigeria where criminal justice is significantly defined by the politics of corruption, social order will be largely elusive and in its place, there will be an obvious consistency in criminal activities in the country. The paper recommends among others that the government should strengthen the criminal justice system and provide an enabling environment for it to function effectively if social order is to be achieved in Nigeria.

25. Criminal justice policies and practices

2021 ◽  
pp. 743-767
Author(s):  
Steve Case ◽  
Phil Johnson ◽  
David Manlow ◽  
Roger Smith ◽  
Kate Williams
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Criminal Justice System ◽  
Government Policy ◽  
Justice System ◽  
The People ◽  
System P ◽  
The Media ◽  
The Government ◽  
Media Corporations ◽  
Policies And Practices

This chapter studies criminal justice policies, practices, and the people who work within the system. It begins by tracing the origins and influences of criminal justice policies. Criminal justice policies predominantly come from the government, but other organisations and individuals such as academics, the media, corporations, and lobbyists can influence them. The motivations behind these policy influencers may vary, but they all share the ultimate aim of ensuring that their preferred strategy is implemented in practice. The chapter then considers the significant impact that ‘penal populism’ can exert on policy, and how government policy is shaping the ways in which the ‘adversarial-lite’ principle is implemented. It assesses use of both of those policies in practice in the courtroom and the community to see how key principles can play out in reality. Finally, the chapter reflects on the effects of all the components upon the people who work in the criminal justice system.

Cultural competence in criminal justice

2015 ◽  
Vol 23 (5) ◽  
pp. 39-42
Author(s):  
Angela Herbert MBE
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Cultural Competence ◽  
Criminal Justice System ◽  
Justice System ◽  
Chief Executive ◽  
Skills Training ◽  
Voluntary Organizations ◽  
Content Type ◽  
The Government ◽  
Minority Ethnic

Purpose – Considers the role of cultural competence in the criminal-justice system and the crucial role that can be played by the right kind of training. Design/methodology/approach – Argues that there are no quick solutions to disproportionality of black and minority ethnic people in the criminal-justice system but advances the view that while individuals are incarcerated, it is important for the organization and its staff to make provisions that will make a difference. Findings – Suggests that any training provision should be made subject to those industries that are likely to employ black minority ethnic (BME) people, and that offering skills in prison that do not reflect cultural attainment in industry would be setting individuals up to fail. Practical implications – Urges that awareness and training should be embraced throughout all organizations from government policymakers, chief executive officers, management board, operational staff and partners, voluntary organizations and the client or user. Social implications – Argues that commitment from the government and the prison service can result in the provision of the kinds of cultural-competence learning and skills training that can more appropriately meet the needs of, in particular, BME individuals who are frequently ill-equipped when they leave the judiciary system. Originality/value – Concludes that this support would also help to communicate and promote awareness of other people’s cultures, provide insight into their understanding of the organization’s culture while also enabling the public to understand the importance of implementing positive change.

Do Americans Like to Punish?

Metamorphosis ◽  
2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert A. Ferguson
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Criminal Justice System ◽  
Justice System ◽  
Western Europe ◽  
The United States ◽  
Political Values ◽  
The People ◽  
American Prison

This chapter addresses the question of whether Americans like to punish. The United States clearly punishes more heavily and for longer periods than other countries, with comparable social and political values. One can land in an American prison for life over minor offenses—a punishment not used for serious offenses in Western Europe. The leading comparativist on criminology, James Whitman, argues that a politics of dignity has instilled mercy and mildness in European systems, while leveling impulses, distrust of authority, and too much power in the people is said to have left the United States with a criminal justice system long in degradation and short on mercy.

24. Criminal justice institutions

2021 ◽  
pp. 719-741
Author(s):  
Steve Case ◽  
Phil Johnson ◽  
David Manlow ◽  
Roger Smith ◽  
Kate Williams
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Criminal Justice System ◽  
Justice System ◽  
Central Government ◽  
Separation Of Powers ◽  
Considerable Influence ◽  
Home Office ◽  
Governmental Agency ◽  
Independent Judiciary ◽  
The Government

This chapter explores the criminal justice institutions. In practice, the criminal justice system contains five distinct institutions that are responsible for delivering justice: the police, the Crown Prosecution Service (known as the CPS), the courts, probation providers, and prisons. Although they are all part of one overall system, each has different aims, roles, and challenges. Theoretically, the fact that these bodies are all accountable to the separation of powers concept should bring some unity in that it gives Parliament, the independent judiciary, and central government opportunities to shape the system to align with their version of justice. The government can exert considerable influence through the work of the Ministry of Justice or MoJ. The MoJ is currently the most important governmental agency in the criminal justice system, but the larger and more powerful Home Office is also involved to an extent, mainly with the police.

Digital Degradation

2020 ◽  
pp. 113-136
Author(s):  
Sarah Esther Lageson
Keyword(s):  
Big Data ◽  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Criminal Justice System ◽  
Social Inequality ◽  
Justice System ◽  
Digital Technologies ◽  
The Internet ◽  
Technological Systems ◽  
Big Data Technologies ◽  
The Government

Interviews with more than 100 people whose records appear online show how the ability to manage digital punishment is directly tied to a person’s familiarity with technological systems and their faith in bureaucracy. Instead of confronting the government or the criminal justice system, many people engage in digital avoidance, afraid that any attempts will only make the problem worse. This intersection between the criminal justice system and technology reproduces social inequality at the speed of the internet, disproportionately impacting people who have less access to and command over digital technologies. This chapter discusses the qualities of digital punishment, the strategies people who are experiencing digital punishment deploy to deal with their online stigma, and an explanation for why many people choose to engage in digital avoidance rather than try to have their online record removed. Rooted in theories of the digital divide and the disparate impact of big data technologies, the chapter concludes with a discussion of how digital punishment challenges long-held theories of criminal stigma, desistance, and rehabilitation.

A “think piece” on intelligence, investigation and prosecution

2017 ◽  
Vol 24 (3) ◽  
pp. 449-460 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Fitzpatrick
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Criminal Justice System ◽  
Financial Services ◽  
Justice System ◽  
Current System ◽  
Organised Crime ◽  
Home Office ◽  
Effective Response ◽  
Content Type ◽  
The Government

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to expose the failure of the criminal justice system of England and Wales to provide an effective response to widespread fraud and to point to sources from which a new doctrine may be created. The author’s approach draws on public sources, in particular, recent Home Office publications, the work of the House of Commons Home Affairs Committee and studies undertaken by the Mayor of London’s offices in 2014/2015. Design/methodology/approach The paper uses a critical assessment of the criminal justice system based on the author’s own experience as a fraud prosecutor. Findings Among the findings is that, while the failings of the current system have been apparent for some years, the extent and depth of the same failings have not been publicly realised, nor sufficiently acknowledged by the authorities. It has become obvious that the traditional response of the criminal justice system, when employed against fraud, will fail for want of anything corresponding to the resources required. A new doctrine will emerge as the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 is revised and more flexibly employed. The Criminal Finances Bill also holds much promise, in particular, with its new offences akin to money laundering and the provision of powers of investigation at a significantly lower level of command among investigators. However, there remains an apparent reluctance in law enforcement to explain its methodology or to support reform, which would allow a fuller sharing of intelligence and appreciations of threats posed by fraud derived from intelligence with the financial services sector and the victim public. Originality/value The value of the paper is derived from the author’s long experience as a fraud prosecutor and as an adviser to the government, on fraud and organised crime, in a closely related jurisdiction with similar problems, but where greater success has been achieved, namely, Hong Kong.

Missing stitches

Interpreting ◽  
2008 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 34-64 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ruth Morris
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Criminal Justice System ◽  
Justice System ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
Global Village ◽  
Police Investigations ◽  
The Government ◽  
Mere Existence

Along a continuum of interlingual interpreting which begins with police investigations and may end in a supreme court, consistent quality must be assured in order to comply with the standards of justice to which enlightened countries aspire and lay claim. With the advent of the global village, the quantity of cases requiring language mediation has exploded exponentially. The issues involved are not new, and simply put involve arranging for the provision of competent interpreters throughout the criminal justice system. However, the actual provision of quality interlingual interpreting in a criminal justice system is not a straightforward enterprise. The mere existence of legislation requiring the provision of interpreters in courts is not the key element. Nor are insightful comments made by appellate judges in cases brought because of an absence of satisfactory language arrangements. The article shows the problematic nature of interpreting arrangements in the criminal justice system for which the government and its players — even judges — assume no responsibility. The resultant “missing stitches” are likely to deprive those who do not speak the language of the proceedings of their fundamental rights.

scholarly journals HAK NARAPIDANA DALAM SISTEM PEMASYARAKATAN DITINJAU DARI PERSPEKTIF HAK ASASI MANUSIA

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Fransiska Novita Eleanora
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Criminal Justice System ◽  
Justice System ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
Human Being ◽  
System P ◽  
Correctional System ◽  
A Priority ◽  
The Government

Prisoners are persons who undergoing punishment for committed crimes. According to the verdict, a criminal shall be sentenced in prison. However, the rights of the prisoners are protected by the correctional system, and keep them as human being as a whole. They are rehabilitated, guided, and nurtured which the aims is to make them back to community after the sentencing is finished. From the point of view of human rights, are correctional system was made to protect the rights of criminal, where the criminal remains a priority for the government within the criminal justice system.

scholarly journals The Reformulation of Restitution Concept in Juvenile Cases (A Comparative Study with Philippines and Thailand)

2020 ◽  
Vol 07 (03) ◽  
pp. 400-420
Author(s):  
I Wayan Aryana
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Criminal Justice System ◽  
Justice System ◽  
The Philippines ◽  
Literature Study ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
Legal Concept ◽  
The People ◽  
Resolution Model ◽  
System 2

The principles of international law mandate diversion as a model for solving juvenile cases. The diversion model as a resolution model in Indonesia, Philippines, and Thailand is rooted in the traditional culture and local wisdom of the people. Diversion agreement can take form of restitution. This study discusses three issues: (1) diversion in juvenile criminal justice system, (2) restitution in diversion, and (3) comparison of restitution in the Philippines and Thailand. This study employs normative legal approach, which examines the ambiguity of norms of restitution forms. Currently, restitution is interpreted merely as reimbursement for victim. This study collected primary and secondary legal materials collected through literature study. This study employed statutory, legal concept, and comparative law approaches. The focus was on the Philippines and Thailand contexts. The analysis was conducted qualitatively. Diversion is a specialty in the juvenile criminal justice system in which criminal cases committed by children are resolved by deliberation. The result of the diversion agreement can be in the form of restitution as agreed in the deliberation. The Law Number 11 of 2012 on the Juvenile Criminal Justice System recognizes form of restitution. The form is money. It is different from the Philippines and Thailand that formulating a form of restitution in the form of services provided by the perpetrator and/or his family to the victim and/or his family. This form of restitution is based on social realities in which the economic condition of the perpetrator’s family makes it impossible to pay restitution in the form of money. The restitution of work services can be a material for reformulation in the dimension of ius constituendum in Indonesia.

scholarly journals The Right of the Accused to Compensation in the Iranian Criminal Justice System

2018 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 76
Author(s):  
Mansour Rahmdel
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Criminal Justice System ◽  
Justice System ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Penal Code ◽  
Procedure Code ◽  
The Government ◽  
The Right ◽  
International Conventions ◽  
Rule Out

<em>Normally, the right to compensation refers to the victim’s compensation. The legislator also typically refers to the right to it, as the Iranian Criminal Procedure Code has done so in articles 14 and 15. But the present paper, refers not to the victim’s, but the accused right. The Criminal Procedure Code of 1912 and 1999 referred to the possibility of compensating the accused by the iniquitous private complainant. However, none of them referred to the government’s obligation to compensate to the innocent accused. In contrast, the Penal Code of 2014 stipulates the government’s obligation to compensate the defendant for damages, but does not rule out the possibility of compensation by iniquitous complainant. Certainly, it does not exempt the complainant to compensation. Reaffirming the responsibility of the government to offset the losses of innocent accused, in line with international conventions, is one of the highlights of the new code. But the lack of compensation for unjustified detention is one of the gaps in the new code. This paper proposes that the Iranian new code of criminal procedure, serves as a development in respecting the accused right in creating comprehensive compensation schemes.</em>

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document