Ethical Dilemma in the Criminal Justice System
Introduction
The criminal justice is affected by several issues of ethical dilemmas. Every segment and department involve professionals like the judges, the police, the attorneys and even the paroles that make unrealistic decisions putting the integrity of the application of ethical behaviour and principles in question in as far as the administration of justice are concerned (Braswell et al., 2017). The permeation of instances of unethical behaviour and practice in the criminal justice system is rising at an unprecedented rate. From a critical perspective, there are instances where incongruous laws, policy statements and regulatory practices and values that have been formulated and implemented by the criminal justice systems distort the basic concept and understanding of what ethics are and the precepts of their application. The judges, who are charged with a noble task of making essential court decisions have been on a receiving end based on the quality of their decisions and judgements, what guides their choices and how they make those decisions and judgements. This implies that the level of unethical behaviour and practice in the criminal justice system is on an unprecedented level. Don't use plagiarised sources.Get your custom essay just from $11/page
Major Ethical Dilemmas in the Criminal Justice System
The professionals in the criminal justice system like the judges, the attorneys, the paroles and police have a significant responsibility of protecting the laws regarding the administration of justice in a manner that is, ethical and upholds the rule of law (Emmelman 2018). The interplay between the rule of law and morality has, however, taken a central role in thwarting the administration of justice from these professionals. In some cases, the decisions made by these professionals lead to the rise of ethical concerns and how the Law Enforcement Code of Ethics is applied and how it adheres to its mission statement which is enshrined in remaining committed to the law in the course of administering justice to the public. The primary duty of the criminal justice system is to ensure that the public and the communities in which they work to deliver justice are protected against injustices like oppression, discrimination and violence (Klein, Remis & Elm 2015). This noble duty and responsibility of the criminal justice system have however not been fully realized as expected because of various reasons including but not limited to aspects such as corruption and negligence of duties because of interfering political structures and self-interests of professionals.
The judges and the attorneys in the criminal justice systems, for example, have been seriously involved in corruption cases where judges and other essential professionals in the court system accept bribes and fail to administer justice where it is due. The judges have been bribed and continue to be bribed even today, mainly by the criminals who are rich and wealthy. This unethical behaviour has resulted to judges making unethical and irrational judgements and decisions against the poor and the innocent citizens simply because they cannot afford to bribe the judges and also based on the fact that they cannot provide top assistance because of financial constraints. Another reason that has propelled this unethical behaviour is the need to fulfil the selfish interests of the judges and the professionals in the criminal justice systems. Their appetite for money at the expense of administration of fair and trusted justice is unprecedented.
Another instance of an ethical dilemma in the criminal justice system is the avoidance of the administration of justice where it is deserved due to the technicalities of the case involved (Toom et al., 2016). In these cases, it is the role of the judges and all the stakeholders involved in the determination of the case to make just and rational decisions that would help in administering justice fairly and acceptably thereby increasing the confidence of the public. For example, there are many cases in which the judges released offenders of severe felonies, such as murder due to technical issues. Legal technicalities restrict or enable court access, guide legal procedures, and limit the court from passing judgment. The court system, which ought to administer justice to the public, has acquitted many offenders of a peal due to technicalities while they are found guilty during the initial trial. A judge can have substantial evidence that convicts an individual reasonably without a doubt, but technical errors lead to the release of individuals. The aspect is intimidating to the judges and the entire criminal justice system because it prevents justice. The law should be protecting citizens, and when an offender is released on technical grounds, innocent civilians or the victims can be at risk.
Besides, it is an ethical responsibility of the professionals of the criminal justice system to act in a manner that increases public faith and base their decision on the professional code (Miller & Blackler 2017). When the law demands an individual to be set free due to technicalities, the judge should work out of public faith. There are many cases whereby offenders were released due to technicalities. For example, Kevin Lewis McDonald, who was serving a life sentence after being found guilty of assault, was released due to technicalities. The court found out that the governor but an aide did not sign the denial; hence, it was not considered to be official. Arizona court had to make a decision that was not favourable to justify the technical rules. Such determination is hard to make because even an individual without legal knowledge was able to note that the offender was supposed to serve a sentence. The judge, in such cases, is left in an ethical dilemma because releasing such criminal contracts the code of ethics.
There are different moral standards and models surrounding the dilemma in the criminal justice system. After consideration of the ethical principles, the judge can overlook the technicalities involved in the case and pass judgment in the review of the presented evidence. An individual should not be released due to minor issues such as signature or wrong dates. Writing a wrong time or using an incorrect format cannot justify the guiltiness or innocence of individuals. In regards to the practical ethical standard, there should be a balance in decision making. The rule ensures that an individual makes the decision that guarantees wellbeing with less harm. When making a judgment, an individual considers the consequences and impact. In consideration of the practical standard, the judges need to consider the outcome before releasing offenders on technicalities grounds.
The criminal justice system is also faced with the challenge of administering justice based on the application of morality and the principle of moral goodness (Siegel & Worrall, 2018). For example, the common good and fairness standards need to be considered when making a decision. Common goods require justice professionals and paraprofessionals to protect the wellbeing of others and avoid a decision that can cause harm. An individual should also make a decision that is fair to all people. When passing judgment, the judge should consider the common good of the victim and other criminal justice system officials without any consideration of corruption or bribery. In case a criminal is acquitted, the police officers and prison officials will be demoralized.
The police department, which is also an essential administrative unit in the criminal justice systems, is also marred with a lot of issues regarding the ethical dispensation of duties. Some of the most common ethical issues facing the police departments include bribery, incomplete investigation of criminal cases due to corruption and false victimization of innocent citizens due to greed and selfish interests (Cole, Smith & DeJong 2018). The Law Enforcement Code of Ethics articulates those police officers must protect the citizens and the communities in which they work through just administration and application of ethical principles. The police are charged with the responsibilities of protecting the citizens from unjust practices like oppression, violence and ensuring that everyone acts in the interest of the constitution. It is, however, quite surprising and disappointing that the same body that should safeguard the importance of the constitution and the citizens have turned against the citizens and are currently getting involved in serious criminal offences including corruption, murder cases and false victimization of citizens for selfish interests. These unethical behaviour and practices demonstrate the extent to which the criminal justice systems have been entangled with severe instances of ethical dilemmas which require immediate action and overhaul to correct.
Many officials in the police department have turned the agency or the imperative government department into their avenues of selfish interests and thereby bringing questions on the ethical dispensation of duties and even decision-making. The officials in the criminal justice system are faced with a severe issue of moral dilemma that needs to be addressed. Technicalities in the cases give the judges a hard time on whether to acquit or sentence an offender. Many serious felony offenders have been released due to technical errors. When making a decision, the judge should consider both the professional code and ethical standards to ensure that justice is served to the victim and offender.
Conclusion
In conclusion, there are many cases of ethical dilemmas in the criminal justice system that compromise the quality of the decisions and service delivery to the public. Most professionals in the criminal justice system like the judges, the police, the prosecutors and the attorneys have failed to act in the best interest of the rule of law and protect the nation and the public based on the Law Enforcement Code of Ethics. Every level and department in the criminal justice system is faced with unethical issues and behaviour such as corruption, bribery, inconsistent judgement and decision making which have severely compromised the goal and the standards of the dispensation of justice. Innocent citizens who are supposed to be vindicated are convicted because they cannot bribe the corrupt system. The police and other paraprofessionals in the criminal justice systems have been engaged in questionable, unethical practices and behaviours. Sadly, as it sounds, the corrupted system still vindicates and release them with no offence, and this continues to affect society and put the lives of innocent at risk. All these unethical behaviour and practices present a challenge in the administration of justice and the entire system seems to have failed. However, many intervention strategies can still be applied to correct the mess brought out by an ethical dilemma in the criminal justice system.
References
Braswell, M. C., McCarthy, B. R., & McCarthy, B. J. (2017). Justice, crime, and ethics. Taylor & Francis.
Cole, G. F., Smith, C. E., & DeJong, C. (2018). The American system of criminal justice. Cengage Learning.
Emmelman, D. S. (2018). Justice for the Poor: A Study of Criminal Defence Work: A Study of Criminal Defence Work. Routledge.
Klein, S. R., Remis, A. S., & Elm, D. L. (2015). Waiving the Criminal Justice System: An Empirical and Constitutional Analysis. Am. Crim. L. Rev., 52, 73.
Miller, S., & Blackler, J. (2017). Ethical issues in policing. Routledge.
Siegel, L. J., & Worrall, J. L. (2018). Essentials of criminal justice. Cengage Learning.
Toom, V., Wienroth, M., M’charek, A., Prainsack, B., Williams, R., Duster, T. & Murphy, E. (2016). Approaching ethical, legal and social issues of emerging forensic DNA phenotyping (FDP) technologies comprehensively: Reply to ‘Forensic DNA phenotyping: Predicting human appearance from crime scene material for investigative purposes’ by Manfred Kayser. Forensic Science International: Genetics, (22), e1-e4.