Different Views of the US Administrative Justice System

The US Administrative Justice as a Process

The administration of justice in the US involves several steps that begin with the investigation and ends with the conviction of the offender. Decision-making and rules are at the center of the US justice administration system. There are eleven steps in the administration of the justice system. The first step entails investigating the crime (Stojkovic et al., 2014). The step is carried out by the police to gather relevant evidence to support an arrest and identify a suspect. The second step is arrest by taking the suspect into custody. The prosecution is the third step, where prosecutors weigh many factors before they charge a suspect. The fourth step in the administration of justice is the indictment (Guimaraes et al., 2018). In the fifth step, before a trial, the defendant enters a plea in court. The commonest pleas in the US criminal justice system are guilty and not guilty.

The sixth step in the administration of justice is bail or pretrial detention, which is provisional custody before the trial. Plea bargaining is the next step in the administration of justice. Plea bargaining occurs between the prosecutor and the defense attorney. The eighth step is the adjudication of guilt by a jury or a judge, with a participating defense attorney and prosecutor (Feeley, 2019). If a judge finds the accused guilty, they mete out a sentence. The tenth step of the criminal justice system is about appeals in the appellate courts by the attorneys. Lastly, rehabilitation or punishment is administered by the state, federal, or local correctional authorities. In most cases, the majority of the inmates are released before the completion of their sentences (Peak, 2016). The process of administering justice in the US can be likened to a funnel. It is wide at the top but as time goes by it narrows to the bottom. At the beginning of the criminal justice process, numerous cases dwindle as many cases are removed from the process.

The US Administrative Justice as a Network

The administration of criminal justice in the US is comprised of regional and interregional institutes from all over the world. Also, the US criminal justice system operates in collaboration with specialized centers. The primary goal of developing a network in the US criminal justice system is to help the universal communities in strengthening cooperation in the key area of criminal justice and crime prevention (Stojkovic et al., 2014). The networks in the administration of justice provide a wide range of services like public education, exchange of information, training, and research. Additionally, the network offers an ideal medium to develop strategies and share resources for promoting humane and rational criminal justice policies (Peak, 2016). Networking in the administration of criminal justice aims to educate the public regarding the policies and issues that influence the criminal justice system. The network comprises representatives like advocates, policymakers, judges, individuals, defense bars, and state affiliates.

The US Administrative Justice as a Non-System

The US administrative system is comprised of three major divisions: corrections, law enforcement, and judiciary. Law enforcement is made up of the police force whose main task is crime detention, crime prevention, and apprehension of suspects for the various crimes committed. The judiciary is the second division that determines the level of punishment to be given. The level of punishment to give depends on two primary factors: whether the suspect has a history of crime or it is the first time they are committing a crime (Guimaraes et al., 2018). Thirdly, corrections are responsible for handling punishments from hardcore convicts to first-time offenders. The corrections, the judiciary, and law enforcement may seem entwined but are segregated in the administration of justice. In a given town, law enforcement can be interweaved but separated. The judiciary is interlinked but segregated since it consists of the tribal council, the courts, lawyers, clerks, and judges. Each position is tasked with different jobs. All levels within the judiciary operate as disenfranchised and separate to enforce the administration of justice in the US as a non-system (Peak, 2016). The corrections unit comprises segregated units such as parole officers, rehabilitation centers, prisons, and jails. Corrections function in mysterious ways, thereby justifying the administration of criminal justice in the US as a non-system.

Similarities of the US Justice Administrative System

The administration of justice in the US affects every person’s life in one way or the other. Administrative justice is composed of different bodies like complaint handlers, tribunals, and courts among others. Whether the US administrative justice is perceived as a network, process, or a non-system, the bottom line is it is all about laws surrounding dispute resolution and decision-making of public bodies. US administrative justice deals with many more cases than private or criminal civil justice (Peak, 2016). All three views hold that the US administrative justice system guides government officials in making the right decisions regarding issues such as immigration, social care, health, education, and housing. Such decisions have a substantial impact on minorities and the most vulnerable communities. The way the US administrative justice helps citizens seek redress against public corporations indicates the state’s approach to values of dignity and equality (Feeley, 2019). The US administrative justice is complex like in many other nations. It is challenging to determine the government level, whether supranational, devolved, regional, or federal, has responsibility for redress and different features of the law. The complexity could be one of the primary reasons why US administrative justice can be ignored and unseen by both the media and the policymakers.

References

Feeley, M. M. (2019). Two models of the criminal justice system: An organizational perspective. In Criminal Courts (pp. 201-220). Routledge.

Guimaraes, T. A., Gomes, A. O., & Guarido Filho, E. R. (2018). Administration of justice: an emerging research field. RAUSP Management Journal, 53, 476-482.

Peak, K. J. (2016). Justice administration. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Stojkovic, S., Kalinich, D., & Klofas, J. (2014). Criminal justice organizations: Administration and management. Cengage learning.