Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Faults in the Canadian justice system
Faults in the Canadian justice system
Faults in the Canadian justice system
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Faults in the Canadian justice system
The judiciary is an important branch of government that sets the standards necessary to ensure that society may thrive in a safe environment. Nevertheless, judicial systems vary from country to country, depending of the respective political, cultural, and historical situations. Such is the case for the judicial systems of Canada and the Republic of Belarus. Therefore, this paper will establish the similarities and differences between the structure and nature of the judicial system, the legal profession, as well as the structure and nature of the correctional systems of both countries. Additionally, this paper will use Hofstede’s Cultural Dimensions to explain the similarities and differences between the two countries, in respect to the three …show more content…
The presiding power is the Supreme Court of Canada, and at the bottom of the hierarchy, the provincial or territorial courts oversee their respective jurisdictions (The Canadian Judicial System, n.d). The Supreme Court is the final court of appeal in Canada, which means that if the verdict was unsatisfactory in previous courts hearings, the case can be repealed up the chain and ultimately receive its final verdict from the Supreme Court (The judicial structure, 2016). Usually, the procedures of the judicial system are separated into the trial level and the appeal level; however, there are some alternatives outside of the typical court system (The judicial structure, 2016). For instance, individuals may seek judicial assistance from administrative tribunals or the alternative dispute resolution institute (CJC-MCC, n.d.). These legal bodies focus on specific areas of law such as refugee claims, issues with government regulations, familial conflicts, amongst others. In other respects, the nature of Canadian judicial system is to be fair and just (The Role of the Courts, n.d.). For this reason, the Supreme Court …show more content…
In order to become an attorney in Canada, students are required to obtain a Pre-Law undergraduate degree or have completed 90 credit hours towards a Bachelor’s degree (“How to become a lawyer in Canada”, 2015). Upon receiving their degree, students must pass the law school admission test (LSAT), which is a standardized entrance exam offered four times per year. It focuses on reading comprehension, analytical and logical reasoning. Should the students pass, they may attend a law school in Canada. Finally, the students must complete the provincial bar admission course, which differs depending on the province (“How to become a lawyer in Canada”, 2015). Since education falls under provincial responsibilities, there are no national accreditation organizations (University of Toronto, 2012). Therefore, in order to work as a lawyer in Canada, it is best to work in private firms, for public interest or in the government (University of Toronto, 2012). According to The Counsel Network (2016), Canadian lawyers with one year of experience earn an average annual wage of $100 000, which can increase up to $160 000 per annum by the 7th year. Despite the envious wages they earn, according to the Law Society of BC, perception of lawyers have only recently been improving as popular opinion becomes more appreciative. This rise in approval may be due to the recent modification in lawyer ethics, specifying honor,
... of the judiciary as being one separate from government, in a non-political capacity whose purpose is not to question the acts of government, but rather to be the mediator when dispute arise (McLachlin, 2009). Clearly, McLachlin captures the essence of what the judiciary is. The Supreme Court of Canada is one of the most visible and trusted political institutions, which has shaped the country’s political arena. In practice, the Supreme Court of Canada does have a quasi-legislative effect on public policy.
The hierarchal structure of the federal court system consists of the Supreme Court, Courts of Appeals, Bankruptcy Appellate Panels, District Courts, Bankruptcy Courts, and Article I Courts (Hogan, 2010). The Supreme Court is the highest court in the nation. Its primary role is to review decisions made by lower courts of appeals, where the case involves the federal law or Constitutional law. The Court of Appeals primary role is to hear cases involving challenges to the judgment made in District Courts, as well as appeals from federal administrative agencies decisions. Bankruptcy Appellate Panels primary role is to hear decisions made in bankruptcy court and determine if they follow the law. District Courts primary role is to determine all facts and evidence in a case while applying the law to decide who is right. Bankruptcy
Burstein, P. (2008). The Role of a Defence Counsel. In J. V. Roberts, & M. G. Grossman (Eds.), Criminal Justice in Canada: a Reader (3rd Edition ed., pp. 48-58). Toronto: Thomson Nelson.
In response, the court system for many years has tried to formulate the policies that will address the issue of public confidence. In the Roberts’ article, it is suggested that even though a slight majority of Canadians have trust in the justice system, the citizens seem to have more faith in institutions other than in the courts (159). This difference is mainly because of the perception that the public has on the justice system in regards to its practices (Roberts 164). The public appears dissatisfied with some practices of the court leading to decreased confidence in the system. For instance, most Canadians feel that the justice system failed to reduce crime in the country. Instead, they argue that it is among the primary causes of increased crime rate (Roberts 164). Most citizens claim that allowing a guilty person walk free is worse off when compared to convicting an innocent one (Roberts 171). Boosting public confidence is, thus, critical to improving the criminal judge. Apparently, this can be accomplished as mentioned by Anthony N. Doob in the article, increased engagement of an ordinary citizen in the courts is needed,
As noted by Allen (2016), measures that are implemented outside the courtrooms, especially in a formal procedure, may lead to the provision of accurate as well as timely considerations for youth crime. As such, Canada is keen in the reinforcement of these regulations, as they determine both short and long-term judicial solutions. Most importantly, the Youth Criminal Justice Act (YCJA) in Canada plays a major role in the implementation of extrajudicial measures as they may affirm to the occurrence of future issues. According to the Government of Canada (2015a), this calls for an attempt to channel out or divert such offenders from the mainstream justice system to a lesser formal way of dealing with the offenses. This paper attempts to investigate the appropriateness of the extrajudicial measures in Canada, and the reason behind why we established these provisions of the YCJA. It also illustrates an example of a Canadian case, which questions the extrajudicial measures. This discussion canvasses the main argument as for or against the extrajudicial measures in Canada through the adoption of recommendations to the Canadian Government about the proper situations in which such processes should be used.
In the year 1970, the Canadian government founded the Law Reform Commission of Canada to ensure the progression of law making and to make recommendations for legal changes . The Law Reform Commission of Canada is constantly importing and suggesting proposals towards the criminal code of Canada. During the year of 1985, t...
Throughout the years there has been limitless legal cases presented to the court systems. All cases are not the same. Some cases vary from decisions that are made by a single judge, while other cases decisions are made by a jury. As cases are presented they typically start off as disputes, misunderstandings, or failure to comply among other things. It is possible to settle some cases outside of the courts, but that does require understanding and cooperation by all parties involved. However, for those that are not so willing to settle out of court, they eventually visit the court system. The court system is not in existence to cause humiliation for anyone, but more so to offer a helping hand from a legal prospective. At the same time, the legal system is not to be abuse. or misused either.
Over the next 10 years the criminal Justice system could entirely change with the passing of a major law, epidemic, or failed service. Consequently, every since 9-11 our justice system has become much more open minded. Therefore, resulting in the strict enforcement of laws to protect its citizens. Nothing ever stays the same for too long. New developments related to science, technology, DNA analysis, and countless other tools and other factors are changing for the better in solving cases, prevention of crimes, and aiding in investigations. Where there is change there will be changes in the way we handle everyday processing. For example, booking a criminal, acquiring evidence, and interrogation. This also results in the field of criminal justice having no choice but to adapt to the slowly changing times or else be left behind.
The crowded courtroom was absolutely silent as the 12 all white and all men took their seats at the jury box. Chief Justice Albert Mason, one of the presiding judges in the murder case, asked Charles I. Richards, the foreman, to rise. Mr. Richards was asked to read the verdict. “Not guilty”, replied the foreman. Even though the circumstantial and physical evidence pointed to Lizzie Borden guilty of killing her step-mother and father, the all-male jury, men of some financial means, could not fathom that a woman who is well bred and a Sunday school teacher could possibly do such a heinous crime (Linder 7).
The federal government consist of three branches for each one has a specific role that protects and serves each person in the United States. The Constitution established these branches to enhance a stronger federal government as well as to make sure the states worked as one instead as individuals. The method in which it is used goes by Judicial, Legislative, and Executive, these branches go from creating the laws, to implementing laws, to finally interpreting the law. It became known as checks and balances, so that no branch would over power another. Once creating these boundaries, the government became more unified and therefore able to control the country much more formally through the courts. To see the beginning of the never ending, the
Through a functionalist perspective, the justice system is an institution based upon the belief that justice, equality and fairness help to form the basic framework of society. If there is deviance, defined as “behavior that violates the standards of conduct or expectations of a group or society” (Witt 135), the society must discover how to deal with it. Examples of crime, which is an aspect of deviance, are theft, murder, and sexual assault. Another concept of this institution is the concept of social control, defined as “the techniques and strategies for preventing deviant human behavior in any society” (Witt 130). Through this concept, the justice system strives to direct individuals to be morally correct. The justice system is a dominant part of this by handling crime through punishment such as arrest. Therefore, when the officers that were a part of the justice system in this article partook in shooting different individuals, this can be viewed as the institution handling deviance through social control. If there was not this social control, then the justice system would not be doing its job that contributes to the overall higher structure of
The American Court System is an important part of American history and one of the many assets that makes America stand out from other countries. It thrives for justice through its structured and organized court systems. The structures and organizations are widely influenced by both the State and U.S Constitution. The courts have important characters that used their knowledge and roles to aim for equality and justice. These court systems have been influenced since the beginning of the United State of America. Today, these systems and law continue to change and adapt in order to keep and protect the peoples’ rights.
With in this courtroom observation paper I will form two articles and classroom knowledge to show the relevance they play within courts today. First, local legal culture, in "court culture" concept is based on dimensions of solidarity and sociability, the intersections of which create four cultures with associated case management types: hierarchical culture (rule-oriented case management); networked culture (judicial consensus); autonomous culture (self-managing); and communal (flexible case management). The second being, court guidelines and the sentencing structure, how’s it work, and why out comes different areas that defer from Kalamazoo and Southwest Michigan as a hole.
The grounds of judicial review help judges uphold constitutional principles by, ensuring discretionary power of public bodies correspond with inter alia the rule of law. I will discuss the grounds of illegality, irrationality and proportionality in relation to examining what case law reveals about the purpose and effect these grounds.
Firstly in this report, I will be giving the different definitions of rule of law by different philosophers; secondly, I will be applying the rule of law to the English Legal system and thirdly I will be explaining separation of powers with a focus on the impartial judiciary. Finally, I will be using cases to support every detailed point given.