Making Justice Equal
Dec 14, · What a Biden administration could mean for criminal justice reform allowed for harsh drug sentences to be relieved and gives judges more discretion to . Criminal Justice System: Ethics in Criminal Procedure Ethics refers to the principles of morality that govern an individual's behavior. Ethics, therefore, provides the basis through which an individual defines, and distinguishes between the good and the bad.
Candice Norwood Candice Norwood. Daniel Bush Daniel Bush. President-elect Joe Biden will face pressure when he takes office to make swift changes to the Department of Justice. Coming off a presidential campaign revived by the support of Black voters discretjon a year marked by national protests against racial injustice and police brutality, Biden is expected to address systemic racism and discrimination that persists in the criminal justice system.
When he takes office, Biden will have some powers to shape federal, state and local policing. He has pledged to launch robust investigations into patterns of local police misconduct, which could pave the way for long-term changes by providing a model and set of standards for agencies around the country, criminal justice researchers said.
He has pledged to end mandatory minimum sentences, a particular sore point for the president-elect, who championed legislation in the s that drove the use of mandatory minimums and other punitive measures.
At the federal level, his Justice Department is expected to reinstate guidance to end the use of private prison contractors. The success of those will depend on congressional support for his agenda. Using that power, the Obama administration launched 25 investigations into police departments.
Such probes can result in consent decrees — court-enforced agreements — between police agencies and the DOJ that have largely been used to help reduce racial discrimination and iustice accountability in policing through use-of-force restrictions, body cameras or bias trainings. Data on racial bias in police use of force is scarce, but research indicates that Black, Latino and Native American people are more likely to experience fatal and nonfatal police force.
President George W. But police investigations declined sharply under Trump. Under Trump, Justice Department officials have rejected accusations that police departments suffer crimina systemic problems like racial bias.
That office is largely responsible for providing funding to local departments for hiring and training. That approach can allow departments to mitigate areas of concern before they become patterns of unconstitutional conduct, said Christy Lopez, a Georgetown University law professor who served criminwl deputy chief of the Special Litigation Section under Obama.
Moving the needle on reform will require Biden to disvretion a culture both within the DOJ and among local law enforcement that embraces federal oversight as a necessary tool, experts said. The DOJ can require departments to report use of force data as a condition of federal funding. Biden will face skepticism from reform advocates critical of his role championing tough on crime legislation that had a disproportionate impact on low income communities and communities of color.
In recent years, prison reform initiatives have received increasing bipartisan support among state and federal officials. Cities across the country are decriminalizing illicit drug possession and establishing alternatives to incarceration for certain drug offenses, although these have their own challenges.
The Trump administration received widespread praise for its support of the First Step Act, which among other things, allowed for harsh drug sentences to be relieved and gives judges more discretion to avoid mandatory minimum sentences.
But the First Step Act has its challenges, including hurdles that make it difficult to complete programs required for early release eligibility, said Lauren-Brooke Eisen, director of the Justice Program at the Brennan Center for Justice at New York University. Beyond the First Step Act, the Trump administration rescinded an Obama-era memo instructing DOJ officials not to renew contracts with private prison operators.
Obama launched an ambitious clemency initiative and commuted sentences for more prisoners than any other U. But the clemency program also created layers of administrative what does discretion mean in criminal justice that made it difficult for clemency applications to be approvedBertram what i think about you. Addressing these layers of review is one key way Biden can make the clemency process more efficient, some experts say.
Jack Donson, a prison consultant who worked for the Bureau of Prisons for 23 years, said he also wants to see more focus from Biden on improving transparency within the bureau. But as with law enforcement agencies, the department dscretion investigate and pursue consent decrees with states or individual facilities in order to change conditions in prisons and jails determined to be in violation of the constitution, such as the 8th Amendment forbidding cruel and unusual punishment.
The department also sued the state of Alabama this month for failing to prevent prisoner-on-prisoner violence and sexual abuse, as well as excessive force used by correctional staff. But that would require congressional approval. With control of the Senate contingent on two runoff races in January, successfully enacting such a how long do brussel sprouts take to grow would require that either Democrats win a Senate majority or some Republican cross the aisle and support the grant funding.
Eisen of the Brennan Center expressed optimism that the program could receive bipartisan support, noting it could help reduce the prison population by 20 percent over 10 years, as well as decrease government costs to imprison people. But the division is also responsible for voting rights enforcement — an area advocates say what should i do after 10th ignored by the Trump administration and should be a top priority under Biden as states prepare for a bruising redistricting battle based on the results of the U.
The ruling allowed certain states and local jurisdictions — most of them in the Deep South — with a history of discrimination in voting to make election law what is probation before judgement without clearing them first with the federal government under Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act.
After the ruling, states like Georgia and North Carolina that had required preclearance under Diwcretion 5 moved quickly to implement changes that critics said were designed to make it harder for people of color to vote. Republican-controlled state legislatures were further emboldened under Trump because the Civil Rights Division stopped prioritizing voting rights enforcement, former Justice Department officials and voting rights advocates said.
The Civil Rights Division is a proactive division. It has to launch investigations. If it just does nothing, it becomes completely dhat. The Supreme Court decision gave Congress the option to set a new coverage formula determining which states and local governments should get federal approval first before changing their election laws.
Even if Republicans retain control of the Senate, though, voting rights advocates said there are other steps the Justice Department can take to boost enforcement, including filing lawsuits against state legislatures under Section 2 of the Voting Doea Act, which bars voting rules that discriminate based on race.
Cosby and others acknowledged the legal challenges under Section 2 of meah Voting Rights Act xoes years to work their way through the courts. High-profile lawsuits could wind up before the Supreme Court, where the new conservative majority is unlikely to expand voting rights protections, legal experts agree. More than 20 states have deadlines requiring that their legislatures or independent commissions draw new political maps by the how do i upload my cv to linkedin of The process will set what does discretion mean in criminal justice district lines for state legislative seats and will play a role in the fight for control of the House in the midterms.
Democrats hold a slim majority in discrretion House after losing more than 10 seats in November. Support Provided By: Learn more. Friday, Apr The Latest. World Agents for Change. Health Long-Term Crminal. For Teachers. About Feedback Funders Support Jobs. Close Menu. Email Address Subscribe. What do you think? Leave a respectful comment.
Close Comment Window. Yes Not now. By — Candice Norwood Candice Norwood. By — Daniel Bush Daniel Bush. Leave a comment. Share on Facebook Share on Twitter. Tackling mass incarceration and prison conditions Biden will face skepticism from reform advocates critical of his role championing tough on crime legislation that had a disproportionate impact on low income communities and communities of color.
Additional Support Provided By:.
Educate your inbox
An ideal Prosecutor must consider herself/himself as an agent of justice. In India, we have a public prosecutor who acts in accordance with the directions of the judge. Normally, the control of entire trial is in the hands of the trial judge. Investigation is the prerogative of the police. However, it is generally believed that traditional right of nulle prosequi is available to the prosecutor. However, this does not mean that your child’s potential employer will not find out about his juvenile arrest record. Most employers conduct a comprehensive background search that is completed by FDLE, the state agency that keeps all records of criminal history in the State of Florida. A copy of this criminal record can be obtained from FDLE. Dec 08, · As a whole, the criminal justice system suffers from a lack of oversight and accountability. 69 Although data on indigent defense systems are .
In India, we have a public prosecutor who acts in accordance with the directions of the judge. Normally, the control of entire trial is in the hands of the trial judge. Investigation is the prerogative of the police.
However, it is generally believed that traditional right of nulle prosequi is available to the prosecutor. The public prosecutor in India does not seem to be an advocate of the state in the sense that the prosecutor has to seek conviction at any cost. The prosecutor must be impartial, fair and truthful, not only as a public executive but also because the prosecutor belongs to the honourable profession of law, the ethics of which demand these qualities.
In India, the criminal justice system should function within the framework of the Indian Constitution. Succinctly speaking, the principles enunciated in the Constitution are as infra : 1. Presumption of innocence: Accused presumed to be innocent 4. Equality: The guarantee of equality before the law. Equal Protection: Equal protection of the laws.
Beyond all reasonable doubt: The guilt must be proved beyond all reasonable doubt 4. Double jeopardy: Protection against double jeopardy Non-retrospective punishment 5. Prohibition of discrimination: Prohibition of discrimination imposed upon the State 6. The right of the accused to remain silent 7. Speedy trial. Coming the Directorate of Prosecution is concerned, the objective behind establishing the Directorate of Prosecutions was to exercise close supervision and scrutiny of work relating to various prosecuting agencies at Sessions and Assistant Sessions levels except at the High Court level.
This Directorate is headed by a Director assisted by other subordinate rank officials and ministerial staff. They evaluate the evidence in each case and make their recommendations for filing revision petitions or appeals against impugned orders and judgments, as well as conduct cases in Courts of MetropolitanMagistrates.
The Allahabad High Court had ruled that it is the duty of the Public Prosecutor to see that justice is vindicated and that he should not obtain an unrighteous conviction. The prosecution of the accused persons has to be conducted with the utmost fairness. In undertaking the prosecution, the State is not actuated by any motives of revenge but seeks only to protect the community.
The only aim of a Public Prosecutor should be to aid the court in discovering truth. A Public Prosecutor should avoid any proceedings likely to intimidate or unduly influence witnesses on either side. The duty of a public Prosecutor is not merely to secure the conviction of the accused at all costs but to place before the court whatever evidence is in the possession of the prosecution, whether it be in favour of or against the accused and to leave the court to decide upon all such evidence, whether the accused had or had not committed the offence with which he stood charged.
The duty of the Public Prosecutor is to represent the State and not the police. There can be no manner of doubt that Parliament intended that Public Prosecutors should be free from the control of the police department. The Andhra Pradesh High Court had ruled that prosecution should not mean persecution and the Prosecutor should be scrupulously fair to the accused and should not strive for conviction in all these cases.
It further stated that the courts should be zealous to see that the prosecution of an offender should not be given to a private party. The Court also said that if there is no one to control the situation when there was a possibility of things going wrong, it would amount to a legalised manner of causing vengeance.
A Public Prosecutor cannot appear on behalf of the accused. It is inconsistent with the ethics of legal profession and fair play in the administration of justice for the Public Prosecutor to appear on behalf of the accused.
No fair trial when the Prosecutor acts in a manner as if he was defending the accused, It is the Public Prosecutors duty to present the truth before the court. Fair trial means a trial before an impartial Judge, a fair Prosecutor and atmosphere of judicial calm. The Prosecutor who does not act fairly and acts more like a counsel for the defense is a liability to the fair judicial system. The statutory responsibility for deciding upon withdrawal squarely vests unwavering with the Public Prosecutor and should be guided by the Criminal Procedure Code The statutory responsibility for deciding upon withdrawal squarely vests on the Public Prosecutor and is entirely within the discretion of the Public Prosecutor.
But, the District Magistrate cannot command and can only recommend If there is some issue that the defense could have raised, but has failed to do so, then that should be brought to the attention of the court by the Public Prosecutor The Supreme Court stated that the duty of the Public Prosecutor is to ensure that justice is done. It stated that if there is some issue that the defense could have raised, but has failed to do so, then that should be brought to the attention of the court by the Public Prosecutor.
But, the District Magistrate cannot command and can only recommend. The Supreme Court stated that the duty of the Public Prosecutor is to ensure that justice is done. Section 24 of Cr. Sub-section 3 says down that for every district, the state government shall appoint a public prosecutor and may also appoint one or more additional public prosecutors for the district.
Sub-section 4 requires the district magistrate to prepare a panel of names of persons considered fit for such appointment, in consultation with the sessions judge. Sub-section 5 explains an embargo against appointment of any person as the public prosecutor or additional public prosecutor in the district by the state government unless his name appears in the panel prepared under sub-section 4.
Sub-section 6 provides for such appointment wherein a state has a local cadre of prosecuting officers, but if no suitable person is available in such cadre, then the appointment has to be made from the panel prepared under subsection 4. Subsection 4 says that a person shall be eligible for such appointment only after he has been in practice as an advocate for not less than seven years.
Section 25 deals with the appointment of an assistant public prosecutor in the district for conducting prosecution in the courts of magistrate. In the case of a public prosecutor also known as district government counsel criminal there can be no doubt about the statutory element attached to such appointment by virtue of this provision in the CrPC In this context, section of the CrPC is also relevant.
As already mentioned, it permits withdrawal from prosecution by the public prosecutor or assistant public prosecutor in charge of a case with the consent of the court at any time before the judgment is pronounced. This power of the public prosecutor in charge of case is derived from the statute and must be exercised in the interest of the administration of justice.
There can be no doubt that this function of the public prosecutor relates to a public purpose entrusting the officer with the responsibility of so acting only in the interest of administration of justice. But the conclusions of some courts create doubt as to its exact nature.
To the suggestion that the public prosecutor should be impartial a judicial quality , the Kerala High Court equated the public prosecutor with any other counsel and responded thus: Every counsel appearing in a case before the court is expected to be fair and truthful. He must of course, champion the cause of his client as efficiently and effectively as possible, but fairly truthfully.
He is not expected to be impartial but only fair and truthful. State of Kerala Cri. In Vineet Narain vs Union of India , when the court focused that the CBI failed to investigate properly offence involving high political dignitaries. In Jitendra Kumar Ajju vs.
The Public Prosecutor has been described as a Minister of Justice who plays a critical role in maintaining purity and impartiality in the field of administration of criminal justice. But its analysis of the crisis is disturbing. Rather than focusing on key issues that plague the Criminal Justice System, the Committee recommended changes that amounted to a complete departure from jurisprudential norms.
In Shonandan Paswan v. Mumtaz v. Nandini Satpathy [ Cri. State of Haryana [ Cri. State of Maharashtra [ SCC Cri ] found that irrespective of the executive or judicial nature of the office of the public prosecutor, it is certain that one expects impartiality and fairness from it in criminal prosecution.
The Supreme Court in Mukul Dalal v. Union of India 3 SCC also categorically ruled that the office of the public prosecutor is a public one and the primacy given to the public prosecutor under the scheme of the court has a social purpose.
But the malpractice of some public prosecutors has eroded this value and purpose. Conclusion: The commission of a criminal act is commonly regarded as an offence against the State which to be dealt with by the Criminal Justice machinery of the State Executive. Therefore, on thorough considerations of the above material, it is crystal clear that it is not the duty of Public Prosecutors to quest conviction at all cost.
Nor, is their duty to act as an avenging angle for the victim. On the contrary, their fundamental duty is to ensure that justice is delivered and in pursuance of this they should lay before the court all relevant evidence including the evidence that favours the accused. Corollary to this is the duty of a Public Prosecutor to bring to attention of the Court, any issue that the defense could have raised, but has failed to do.
But, in doing so, they cannot act as if they are defending the victim, nor can they appear on behalf of the accused. The Public Prosecutor represents the State but not the police and can only be influenced by public interest. A fortiori, a Public Prosecutor has the responsibility of a minister of justice and not simply that of an advocate. Important Judgments to know about the functions of Prosecutors: - R. Boucher, CCC at p. Puddick, ER at p.
See R. Thomas No. Roulston, 2 NZLR at p. Arthur F. McDonald, CCC Mohambaram v. Jayavelu, Cri LJ at p. Emperor, 42 Cal at p.
State of U. State of A. Phota Sk. Sheikh v. Ganesan, Cri. J Mad at -Babu v. LJ Ker at - R. Sorala vs T. For Further Details Contact: editor legalserviceindia.