Comparative justice systems

Comparative Justice Systems
Name:
Institution:
Date:Introduction
The justice systems differ across many countries in the world depending on their judicial wing of the government. The hierarchy of courts in different countries determines how particular types of cases are handled and how the accused are charged. The corrections administered to the individuals also vary according to the set punitive measures as stipulates in their constitutions. Today, the justice system faces many problems due to an increase in the types and nature of criminal activities commuted by offenders. Some of this acts according to (Dammer & Albanese., 2014) do not have a definitive approach the matter will be dealt with. For this reason, some countries like Norway have a board task with dealing with certain societal related cases since their justice system lacks the clauses of references that can be used to prosecute the offenders. The evolutions of the judiciary in many countries of the world have made it easier to compare the systems and gain insight of how particular cases can be handled. These have helped many nations in redesigning their justice system to allow them to emulate some of the aspects of a justice system that has shown more success. For instance, the United States has a challenge in solving juvenile cases. By comparing different juvenile justice system of various countries, the country can be able to develop a more informed and success guaranteed justice system that will ensure that juveniles are not treated as adults and that they are given a second chance to rebuild their future.

It is thus of significant importance to study how various countries handle their justice system under, policing/law enforcement, correction, court systems and how their investigative agencies work to ease the work of the prosecutors and the judges.
Comparative justice systems: U.S, Italy, and Norway
These three countries have some different aspects in their justice systems. This is due to the differences in cultural practices and the political system of the tree countries. Additionally, their constitutions are not the same and these impacts in the judicial arm of their respective governments. For this reason, their punitive laws and court systems slightly vary.
Court system Law enforcement/policing corrections Investigative agencies.
United States The court system of the United States is diverse and different in all the states. However, the standard court layout of the United States includes three levels in the hierarchy. Trial court, appellate court and supreme courts are the three categories of the courts in the country. At least in each state, the systems are similar to this one. The federal court system hears cases from the trial courts first then reviewed by appellate courts and ends with the court of the last resort; supreme court of the United States CITATION USC16 l 1033 (USCourts, 2016).
Most of the law enforcement responsibilities lie with the state police. Their contribution to the justice system of the US is undeniably huge. Most of the crimes committed in the country constitutionally fall under the jurisdiction of the state police including the county police, Sheriffs, municipal police. Additionally, specialized units like the campus, housing, railroad and district police are so vital in law enforcement within the United States. The current justice system of the United States allows offenders to either be imprisoned or rehabilitated CITATION Phe11 l 1033 (Phelps, 2011). This, however, is conditional on the magnitude of the crime committed by the offender and their mental states as well. Those found with mental problems are placed under a rehabilitation program in mental healthcare facilities. However, there are instances where offenders are directed to undertake community-based service as their punitive measures. This differs in states. The major investigative agencies in the country includes:
DEA- these deals with enforcement and investigation of drug-related cases to aid the courts to prosecute the offenders.
FBI- This agency protects the country against terrorism by collecting and acting on any intelligence available. They allow the courts to prosecute the victims.
Homeland security. They deal with all crime investigations including homicides. Other agencies in the United States include Interpol, US Marshal services, US secret service among others.
Italy The Italian court system is designed in a manner that civil, criminal, administrative and penal jurisdictions are served with different courts. However, just like the other countries it has a supreme court that handles cases dealing with intense breach of laws. Their system has shown the least success judging from the wrongful conviction of Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito CITATION Ter13 l 1033 (Terrill, 2013). Their system has grades. 1st grade comprises of juvenile courts and Penal tribunals. The 2nd grade comprises of the court of appeal, tribunals and specialized sections of the court of appeal. The last grade only comprises of the supreme court that deals with infringement of the law. Law enforcement in this country is provided by multiple forces of which five are Italian agencies. They include, the state police tasked with patrolling, investigation and law enforcement, financial guards who are under the ministry of economy and finance, municipal police, corrections officers. Meritorious corps etc. All these branches of the police coordinate with the Justice departments to prosecute those found to commit unlawful accts. Most of the criminal activities in this country are punished by imprisoning the offenders convicted in the courts. This has overcrowded the prisons CITATION Pal13 l 1033 (Ghosh, 2013).
Italy does not embrace rehabilitative or redistributive models in punishing offenders of different crimes. However, there is a demarcation for the ages of the prisoners to be allowed in different prisons. Furthermore, the correctional facilities are differentiated to males, females, and Juveniles. Despite this strict correctional measures adopted by the country, it still offers education and training to the inmates to tap their skills and prepare them to face the outside world. There are various investigation agencies in Italy.
Agency for Internal Information and Security (AISI)-it is a domestic intelligence service
Agency for External Information Security (AISE) – it is an external intelligence agency.
Inter-Ministerial Committee for Security of the Republic (CISR).
Center for Inter-force Intelligence (CII)-it is a military based investigation unit that deals with various matters.
Norway The court system is hierarchical in nature. Supreme Court, high courts, and the country courts are the three-court system the country has.
The county courts include the district courts and the city courts. However, the country has ad hoc tribunals that deals with specific cases like the Land Appointment court, Labor disputes Courts, etc. The law enforcement units in this country comprise of the state police who are divided into 27 regional departments and seven nations departments. It is believed that the Norwegian Police is among the most unarmed in the world since they do not carry firearms instead they carry telescopic batons and pepper spray The correction facilitates in this country are among the best. The inmates are treated just like the other persons only that they are restricted to be only within the institution. Other than the prisons, according to CITATION Ter13 l 1033 (Terrill, 2013), Norway allows a rehabilitative measure to certain cases. The justice system also allows community service as punishment. There are country based agencies. Other international agencies like Interpol and Europol are also operating in these countries:
National Security Authority (NSA).
Police Security Service (PST).
-NIS
Evaluation of Criminal Justice Systems
The justice system of the three countries differs in some aspects. The United States system both centralized and decentralizes. The stated of this nation have courts which are independent of the federal government. Although their structure practically seems to be the same, there are slight differences in the operations of the courts in regards to particular matters. According to (US Courts, 2016), there are three distinctive categories of federal courts in the US. The trial courts hear the case, and if a verdict cannot be given, it is reviewed by the court of appeal which can also transfer the case to the last court whose judgment is final; the supreme court of the United States. Among the cases heard in the courts, 80% of them are civil cases while 20% are criminal cases. The primary consideration of the system is the tasks it handles and the jurisdictions the courts have in deciding on the matter. In comparing the system with other best-working systems in the world like Norwegian justice system, it becomes clear that the justice system of the United States still needs some adjustments for it to be effective (Phelps, 2011).
By considering the justice system of Norway, it is believed that the country has one of the best justice system that does not isolate or diminish that dignity of those found guilty of various offenses. Their prisons hold an acceptable number of inmates (Terrill, 2013). Their prisons are said to be the best and most successful in rehabilitating the victims while at the same time acknowledging their rights like for the other citizens. For this reason, even the non-citizens of Norway who are imprisoned in that country are comfortable and do not fear the chance of being isolated/discriminated from the others. All the basic services that are essential for human survival and other recreational services are offered within the correctional facility compound. These have enabled the country to achieve its milestones in rehabilitating the offenders. Virtually, there are significantly few criminal cases in Norway unlike in many countries in the world.
Italian justice system is more like the Norwegian and US systems. However, the system does not produce the best solution to certain cases due to the interference of political interests and personal interests. A good example is the wrongful convictions of Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito due to the self-interest of the judges involved (Terrill, 2013). The prisons in this country are crowded due to increased criminal activities and the negligence of the court system to offer alternative punishment to petty crimes other that imprisoning the offenders. According to (Ghosh, 2013), the use of a rehabilitative and redistributive model in their judicial system can ease the congestion in the prisons and save the country a huge deal of costs for operating the crowded prisons. Although the crime rate in this country is higher compared to the other two nations, its criminal justice system is not working towards solving the inconsistency in passing judgments to those found guilty.
Comparing the two countries criminal justice system with the US, it is seen that there exist huge differences in efficiency of the system. Norway portrays to have the best justice system which treats the offenders rightly offering them a favorable environment for rebuilding their future once more. Adoption of such a system in the United States can reduce the number of criminals sentenced again after serving their time in jail. Since the country also has an increase in the cases of juvenile crimes, such a system will allow those found guilty to continue with their healthy lives in the prison hence giving them a chance to rebuild their behavior and be accepted back into the society later on without isolation or discrimination.
International Policing
Law enforcement units are vital instruments in any nation in the world. They act as the channel through which sanity is maintained in a state or region by abiding by the established rules and regulations of the government. They practice what the constitution of that particular country stipulates and ensure the citizens follow it. Any breaches of the laws are punishable by the courts of the country with aided investigation by recognized agencies in the country. International policing aims at assisting countries investigate and protect the interests of the involved nations. There are law enforcement units like Interpol or Europol which can operate in more than one country to follow up criminal activities that originate from one country and extended to other countries. They have the jurisdiction of arresting the interested persons from any country (Reichel, 2013).
Law enforcement in Norway is seen to be effective and successful due to a fewer number of criminal activities in this country. Their police are unarmed with firearms. Instead, they use pepper spray and telescopic batons for surveillance in the streets. It is believed from the report by (Terrill, 2013) that this country had the least number of violent criminal activities in both rural and urban areas of the nation. This has reduced the number of cases handled by the court’s system of the country and consequently their prison facilities area not crowded. This has allowed the country to provide better services to the inmates and including recreational facilities hence providing a favorable environment for rehabilitation of the inmates within the prison walls. Regarding the perceptions of the citizens of this country, they perceive their justice and policing system effective and believe in all their actions. This kind of confidence with the law enforcement authorities allows them to have the community support in apprehending criminals who might hibernate within them. Their justice system regarding policing is very transparent and allows free exchange of information with the community.
Italy has a diverse number of law enforcement agencies both external and internal. The contribution of this agency in enforcing laws has not seen so much success over the years as per a report released 2000 (Newman, 1999). Although their police service has undergone tremendous changes, its efficiency is yet to reach the desirable limits. The country experience more violent criminal activities are forcing the police to use excessive force when enforcing the laws. The state police are having most of the responsibilities in ensuring both rural and urban areas are free from criminal activities; they face a challenge of increasing new criminal activities in some regions which cannot easily be noted. Their relationship with the community is not robust making it harder for the enforcement units to gather information from the society to help them develop viable strategies. According to (Sara & Rachel, 2007), policy becomes a problem when the authoritative units enforcing it have a negative image in the community. Repulsion will emerge and as a result more criminal activities can go unnoticed or lack substantial evidence to prosecute the offenders. This is the case in Italy where the police lack cooperation of the community in sourcing information about individual criminal acts.
In comparison with the United States police enforcement agencies, there are several similarities with both Norway and Italy. In both Italy and US, most of the jurisdictions of law enforcement as stipulated in their constitutions lie with the state police. They act to ensure the citizens adhere to the laws and uphold the commands the Constitution offers on various issues. Furthermore, in all the three countries, the police are responsible for initiating a prosecution of individuals who are arrested for committing crimes. However, the efficiency of their system differs significantly with Norway having the best policing mechanism and relationship with the community hence avoiding different collisions between the two (Dammer & Albanese., 2014). There are investigative agencies that operate across borders of the various countries. They include FBI, Interpol, and DEA whose tasks are to investigate various criminal activities that link the various countries. They are authorized to operate in any country that they have the intelligence of existence of illegal activities linked to the US.
Comparison of Corrections in the Three Nations
The modes of punishment of those found guilty of certain offenders by the courts differ across the three countries. Prisons are the standard punitive facilities that all the three countries use to lock the offenders from the society for some time. However, the efficiency of this correction in reducing the incidences of criminal activities differs significantly. For instance, some prisons in the United States are said to have violent inmates. This impairs the rehabilitation programs in such institutions making the inmates who have completed their sentences susceptible to committing other crimes. In Norway on the other hand, its correctional facilities are very successful in rehabilitating the inmates by providing them with recreational activities, education, and training to enable them to become responsible citizens even after leaving the prisons. Italy which is a country that experiences many criminal activities has their correctional facilities crowded making it harder for the state government to provide quality services to the inmates to allow them to rebuild their lives. The United States and Norway use rehabilitative program for offenders who are examined and found to be mentally unstable. They are taken to mental health facilities for counseling and guidance other that imprisoning them (Phelps, 2011).
Recommendations to the US Criminal Justice System
The police in the United States have been involved in several misconducts. Therefore the government should invent the use of special prosecutors to in police misconduct investigation. This will ensure the community is satisfied with the laws governing the country as it is in Norway. Policing in this country have led to animosity between the minority and the law enforcement units due to the failure of the justice system to prosecute police officers responsible for deaths of innocent citizens (Nelken, 2009).
The American justice system needs to suspend the operation of the death penalty. Deciding who lives or dies after committing certain crimes depends on several significant factors (Mona, 2010). Some defendants may lack abilities to hire high profile lawyers to defend them leading to their convictions. Just like in Norway, the justice system should allow the offenders to have a second chance in life or stay behind bars for as long as possible until the prison department confirms that the inmate has thoroughly reformed other that imposing the death penalty on them.
The United States court system should repeal the efforts to transfer juveniles into the adult justice system. These will ensure equality in the persons being punished and the intensity of the punishment (Sara & Rachel, 2007). Finally, the justice system of the United States should restore balance in drug control investigation through the DEA. There has been much incarceration of minorities in their fight against drugs. These have stirred a beef between the agents and the minority community leading to frequent collisions where lives are lost in the event. Furthermore, it does not give the minorities a chance to rehabilitate and get off the addiction.
Conclusion
The justice systems of different countries handle similar cases in completely different approaches. Given the distinctions in these countries’ justice systems, there is a significant variation in the success of these systems depending on how the society perceives the apparatus being used to deliver justice to them. Although there are similarities in the court system in the United States and many countries in the world, their punitive measures are entirely different. Therefore the need for reformation in the United States system in policing, investigations, corrections and the alignment of the courts are imperative.
References
BIBLIOGRAPHY Dammer, H. R., & Albanese., J. S. (2014). Comparative criminal justice systems. Belmont, CA: Cengage Learning.
Ghosh, P. (2013, June 18th). Italy’s Overcrowded Prisons: A Growing Tragedy Of Epic Proportions. Retrieved from International Business Times: http://www.ibtimes.com/italys-overcrowded-prisons-growing-tragedy-epic-proportions-1310555
Mona, L. (2010). Sunbelt Justice: Arizona and the Transformation of American Punishment. Stanford: Stanford Law Books.
Nelken, D. (2009). Comparative Criminal Justice: Beyond Ethnocentricism and Relativism. European Journal of Criminology, 6(4), 291-311.
Newman, G. R. (1999). Global report on crime and justice. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Phelps, M. S. (2011). Rehabilitation in the Punitive Era: The Gap between Rhetoric and Reality in U.S. Prison Programs. Law Soc Rev, 33-68.
Reichel, P. L. (2013). Comparative criminal justice systems. Boston: Pearson.
Sara, S., & Rachel, B. (2007). When the Policy Becomes the Problem: Criminal Justice in the New Millennium. . Punishment & Society, 5-26.
Terrill, R. J. (2013). World criminal justice systems: A survey. Waltham, MA: Anderson.
US Courts. (2016). Court Role and Structure. Retrieved from United States Courts: http://www.uscourts.gov/about-federal-courts/court-role-and-structure