Abstract
The criminal justice system (CJS) plays a significant role in keeping society safe by investigating, arresting, charging, prosecuting, sentencing, and punishing people who break the law. Through the effectiveness of the criminal justice system, society has reclaimed sanity through respect for life and property. The United States government is among the many countries globally that have endeavored to enhance the criminal justice system’s operations through funding, campaigns, seminars, training, and staffing. Indeed, the police, the court officials, the prosecution team, and the Department of Correctional Services have undergone many reforms that have improved service delivery. However, one critical part at the center of the operations of the CJS is the defense team. The defense team acts as the harmonizing factor between the accused person and the plaintiff. The emphasis on democracy and the rule of law in most countries globally intended to change all aspects of the social, political, and economic environment, including the CJS. The rise in human rights activism and the demand for due process is one of the milestones that focuses on the accused person’s rights. Among the different rights articulated under various legal provisions, the right to a fair trial is outstanding and forms the basis of this assignment. It is, however, crucial to note that the right to a fair trial depends on an accused person’s ability to access a defense attorney. The biggest challenge that accused persons in various countries face is the government’s laxity in funding the legal team and disregard for the welfare of the people in conflict with the law.
Keywords: Accused person, due process, defense attorney, criminal justice system, funding.
Introduction
The issue of a fair trial in the CJS has been debated for a long time. The people at the receiving end of the CJS are the accused persons who, in most cases, require guidance in interpreting the law. People facing the CJS for the first time find the environment intimidating and alien, unaware of where their rights begin and when the officers in CJS are overstepping their role. It is challenging to talk about fair trial when the people involved need to gain knowledge of the law. One of the most celebrated rights of an accused person is the presumption of innocence until proven guilty by a competent court of law and the right to have legal counsel (Flynn et al., 209). However, the biggest dilemma in the CJS has been the defendants’ level of access to legal counsel as well as the preparedness of the lawyers to mount a solid defense for the accused person.
The standard procedure in most courts is that if a defendant lacks funds to hire a lawyer, the government will provide a defense attorney for the accused (Flynn et al., 210). As much as that has been a good move in ensuring compliance with the due process provisions, there are still high cases of miscarriage of justice. In most cases, the people who conflict with the criminal justice system are the society’s middle to low-income members. Poverty makes a person vulnerable to illegal activities because of limited opportunities for conventional livelihood. The commission of various minors and felonies leads to an influx of accused persons in the CJS who require legal assistance from the government. However, because of changing priorities in government and the pressure to deliver other services to the electorate, most administrations have sidelined the defense attorneys regarding resource allocation and the required funding (Dehaghani & Newman, 35). The number of public defense lawyers is low compared to the accused persons, leading to a high workload, burnout, and miscarriage of justice (Dehaghani & Newman, 35).
It is challenging for defendants to enjoy their right to a fair trial if they have limited legal assistance. Legal assistance ensures that the defendants interpret the charges, prosecution, and court process correctly and ask the relevant questions that can help mitigate the offense (Flynn et al, 210). However, it is crucial to note that the lawyers are willing to help all the accused persons, only that some statutory and political obstacles hinder the process (Dehaghani & Newman, 35). For instance, the state has minimum requirements before it approves funding for an attorney. The most common policy eliminates those people accused of offenses that attract a non-custodial sentence. In such cases, the defense attorneys lack the power to help people who desperately need their help.
The officers within the CJS have unique roles based on their job descriptions. The police officer must ensure law and order by arresting and collecting evidence for prosecution. Conversely, the prosecutors confirm that they convict an accused person within the shortest time possible. The government is the sole financier of law enforcement and prosecution and provides all the resources for their work. Therefore, a situation with a powerful police system, trial, and court means that the accused persons become vulnerable to injustice ( Jaffe, 1468). The only clamor of hope left for the defendants is the defense attorneys who ensure power balance in the CJS and ensure adherence to the rule of law and due process. However, with the current system, where there is less attention to the welfare of the defense attorneys in terms of the supply of enough resources to supplement their work, the defendants are continually suffering at the hands of justice.
Background
The proponents of a fair trial, the right to access a defense attorney, deliberately sought to ensure that the processing of an accused person from arrest to conviction is within the acceptable standards of the law (Flynn et al., 211). A defense attorney must be available immediately after a person commits a crime and is in police custody. The defense team must ensure the police handle an accused person professionally and attend to their unique needs (Flynn et al., 212). However, with the strain on finances and caseloads, the defense team fails to interact with their clients (Jaffe, 1466). In some cases, the accused person meets their lawyer for the first time in court and finds it challenging to confide in the case details (Jaffe, 1466). Some lawyers rush through the court files outside the courtroom, missing the nitty-grits of the case.
The rapport between the attorney and the defendant is critical in determining the success of a criminal case. It is possible for the defendant and the lawyer to develop trust and confide in each other if the process of representation begins early as opposed to during the days of trials (Jaffe, 1466). Research indicates that the courts find most accused persons guilty because of a weak defense presented by the attorneys. One of the critical developm ents within the CJS was the introduction of holistic defense in the early 18th century (Anderson et al., 825).
Holistic defense focuses on how different stakeholders can work together to cater to the welfare of the accused person during pre-trial, trial, and after sentencing (Anderson et al., 821). The holistic defense team includes support staff, children officers, drivers, social workers, and family members (Anderson et al., 821). The team is responsible for deliberating on the client’s essential needs, devising mechanisms that seal all loopholes of an unfair trial, and intervening in future needs. Holistic defense recognizes that every case has unique needs and circumstances, requiring specific time, resources, and personnel (Anderson et al., 821). The areas covered under this model include legal and non-legal services, empowerment of practical communication skills, and help in identifying relevant community services that can expedite the case. However, even though many defense attorneys embraced the idea of a holistic approach to cases, enough funds still need to be allocated. The interviews with various lawyers reveal that they are willing to participate in the welfare of their clients, but the finances allocated to them are insufficient (Flynn et al., 212). Consequently, many accused persons complain of harassment by police officers, loss of personal effects at police custody, and use of enhanced interrogation tactics by law enforcement to achieve a confession. However, with the challenge in legal aid still an issue in most jurisdictions, access to justice and fair trial remains a misery in the CJS.
Recommendations
According to Dehaghani &Newman, (36), access to legal aid is the primary cause of miscarriage of justice, among other unfair practices witnessed within the CJS. However, it is possible to salvage by advocating for enacting a law through the legislature that authorizes automatic funding to government attorneys, just like in other government institutions. The current government policies require adjustment because they deny millions of ordinary citizens access to their fundamental human rights. The changing/enacting of new finance laws within the legislature requires goodwill from the political class. The legislature should collect data highlighting the challenge arising from a CJS that lacks an effective legal team to keep it in balance. One of the biggest challenges that arise from the miscarriage of justice is that society carries the burden of a breadwinner incarcerated unfairly. Issues like an increase in crime, Recidivism, and the onset of drug/substance abuse, which later strains the government, are manageable when there is a working legal team. Therefore, the government and other key stakeholders must prioritize its resources to achieve fair trials through legal representation. It is also crucial to note that people who are guilty beyond reasonable doubt embrace reformation during sentencing and later become resourceful members of society, making access to proper representation a central pillar in the CJS.
Secondly, legal aid and access to proper representation continue to be challenging because of the low number of defense staff. The government has tried to address staff shortages, but the cases continue rising (Dehaghani &Newman, 35). Consequently, there is increased workload, burnout, and other mental health issues that defense attorney battle in their endeavor to achieve justice. The ripple effect falls on the defendant, who requires a competent team to help maneuver the justice team. Therefore, as the government continues to enact policies to ensure funding and hire new staff, the defense team and other stakeholders should leverage pro bono legal services. Thousands of students graduating from law school yearly need to gain some experience before landing a lucrative job. The minimum requirements for enrolling and graduating from a law school are high, ensuring that the best students enter the legal profession. However, finding a job takes time, requiring the graduates to work as volunteers at law firms to gain experience. Therefore, increasing awareness of the dire need for legal services within the CJS can attract Pro bono lawyers who will salvage the mystery in access to justice and fair trial.
Private funding can also be an excellent alternative to help alleviate the challenge of access to legal aid and justice. Private organizations, well-wishers, and tycoons have partnered with other institutions like healthcare, sports, and athletics to ensure seamless processes and maximum profits. Similarly, numerous charity organizations take care of poor and marginalized members of the community, of which some of them are victims of a crooked CJS. People overlook that an effective defense team can be the panacea to most of today’s socioeconomic ills. Therefore, as a means of restoring the lost glory in legal representation, it is lobbying the players within the private sector to invest in helping the vulnerable members access justice without prejudice or delay. Empowering the people through financial aid and income-generating activities by the private sector also ensures that they can hire lawyers and reduce the strain on government-funded attorneys.
Lastly, the issue of eligibility criteria in most countries has hindered many accused persons from accessing legal services. Some countries specify the type of crimes or possible sentences that qualify for government-sponsored legal aid. For instance, there are scenarios where persons accused of felonies, such as murders, have restrictions in accessing a defense counsel(Flynn et al., 208). Stakeholders within the CJS and non-governmental partners must work together to review some of the provisions that deny some accused persons the right to a defense attorney. Everyone must enjoy the right to a fair trial through representation regardless of race, religion, status, or type of offense committed.
In conclusion, access to legal aid is an issue that all countries in the world should make a priority. As part of democracy and a fundamental human right, every accused person must benefit from access to justice without fear, favor, or prejudice. Funding other CJS players like the police, the prosecution, and the prison without empowering the accused persons through legal representation creates an unfair balance in legal access. Therefore, the only way of helping the vulnerable members of society who conflict with the law is to ensure a partnership between government and non-governmental agencies to fund the legal team and enhance its service delivery.
Works Cited
Anderson, James M., Maya Buenaventura, and Paul Heaton. “The effects of holistic defense on criminal justice outcomes.” Harvard Law Review 132.3 (2019): 819-893.
Dehaghani, Roxanna, and Daniel Newman. “Criminal legal aid and access to justice: an empirical account of a reduction in resilience.” International Journal of the Legal Profession 29.1 (2022): 33-52.
Flynn, Asher, et al. “Legal aid and access to legal representation: redefining the right to a fair trial.” Melb. UL Rev. 40 (2016): 207-239.
Jaffe, Samantha. “It’s not you, it’s your caseload: Using cronic to solve indigent defense underfunding.” Mich. L. Rev. 116 (2017): 1465-1484.
write