Assessing the Global Criminal Justice System

Assessing the Global Criminal Justice System



Assessing the Global Criminal Justice System

In overview, the criminal justice structure comprises the judicial courts, law enforcement agencies and a myriad of correctional departments. The main objective of this particular system involves the provision of a secured and safe environment to all citizens via the application of regulations, laws and decrees. The agencies ensure that the state impose regulations which will be highly important especially in the control of criminal acts. In spite of the fair nature and resolve of the criminal justice system, globalization has become a considerable force specifically in marring the structure’s key objective. Accordingly, globalization has influenced the progression of traditional crimes, and simultaneously, established a platform for creating novel and extended variants of felonies, not only in the United States. As such, an assessment of the American criminal justice structure will also involve an evaluation of the respective system within an international level.

The effect of globalization especially on the temperament of crime has contributed significantly to the manner in which individuals engage in wrongdoings and contraventions. In America, the degree to which criminal activities are undertaken has increased significantly. This occurrence has influenced the citizens of the state to protest against authorities for their approach towards the implementation of regulations that can maintain their safety. The evaluation of the tendency towards the respective criminal justice structure within an international scope factors in the worldwide character of felonies within America. Nonetheless, the American system has initiated a response and cooperated with general efforts applied in restraining the frequency and amplifying degree of global crimes.  Interestingly, the alterations within the international scope of criminal justice have caused greater implications for the American system currently.

The emergence of globalization has also influenced various novel challenges for practitioners and researchers. Currently, it has become difficult to find solutions that befit the dynamic forms of terrorisms and crimes committed contemporarily. Concerning this, the most vital aspects comprising such difficulties comprise the international elements of criminal activities, technological impacts on worldwide criminality, the effect of authorized and unauthorized immigration, intercontinental organized crime as well as the effect of a significantly diverse American culture. Therefore, while attempting to curtail these dynamic settings, the American criminal justice framework, which is comprised of the police, the courts and correctional facilities, has been facing novel types of criminality (Schmalleger, 2009). Nonetheless, the general effect of globalization has imposed considerable pressure especially on the government in terms of considering an alternative way of controlling such changes. Such ways ponder over recognition and importance of global cooperation, the emergence of security threats in America and the amplification of new criminal techniques.

Recognizing the significance of international cooperation in terms of crime requires understanding the different forms of criminal justice systems that exist internationally. The aim of this is to fathom and compare the disparate ways in which such frameworks regulate crime and the gaps that they have regarding their specific mandate. Civil law is among the first of this assessment. According to Schmalleger (2009), it emphasizes on judicial interpretation especially in establishing verdicts within courts. Through its direction, judges normally interpret the statute in their appropriateness. Hence, the role of the judge involves investigation of the case and decision-making. In contrast, common law relies significantly on precedence. This is because such jurisdictions emphasize considerably on past judicial decisions unlike civil law. Even though statutes may provide terse statements of general principle, common law possesses the definitions and boundaries of the law.

Socialist law, alternately, is heavily based on the system of civil law. However, this framework accentuates Marxist ideologies and as such, provides for ownership of all property by the state. This is dissimilar since civil law as much as common law struggles to define individual property irrespective of the method of acquisition, transference or loss (Lyman & Potter, 2007). Hence, the disparity between socialist law and other legal structures constitutes possession of authentic property. Lastly, Islamic law, similar to most religious laws, depends on a set of codes and values upheld and established by a respective deity. Classically, this form of legal system did not establish distinctions between worldly and religious life. Regardless, The Qur’an functions as the first and vital reference point for jurisprudence among Muslims (Schmalleger, 2009). However, the major disparity of Islamic law from the mentioned legal systems lies in the role it assumes in the state. For other countries, Islamic law defines the regulations and decrees upon which every person should adhere. In other countries, especially those under common law, it forms part of customary regulation.

In spite of these international justice systems, the advancement of technology has posed a significant on global law enforcement frameworks. For instance, as much as the Internet fosters commerce, it also fuels criminal acts such as fraud and money laundering. Cyber crime is consistently becoming a resonant phenomenon to the progression of technology. Accordingly, while the Internet allows communication for different people globally, criminal institutions are similarly exploiting this capability by fueling illegitimate business enterprises via organized crime (Lyman & Potter, 2007). As such, the impact on law enforcement is significantly evident. Based on the rate at which cyber crime is occurring, law enforcement activities are under the perception that they are insecure. Edward Snowden is an illustration of the insecurity of law enforcement agencies due to cyber crime. Through IT-related criminal activities such as eavesdropping and spying, Snowden was capable of leaking confidential American government documents.

Irrespective of the laws set aside for combating cyber crime and other technology-related crimes, law enforcement agencies still face a considerable challenge in curtailing related misdemeanors. This is because of the advances in technology, which have equipped individuals with the ability to commit crimes. In addition to this, law enforcement agencies lack the resources to combat these forms of crimes. Without the needed skills and facilities, the global justice system will become more incapable of handling felonies related to the cyber space. In the United States, qualified persons are limited since the persons responsible for investigating and assessing cyber-crime need to be trained immensely (Lyman & Potter, 2007). Moreover, they need technical and interrogative skills and extensive information regarding a variety of IT devices and forensic materials.

Even though policing systems all over the world share the common aim of curtailing criminal activities such as cyber crime, the techniques applied and the structure of the police forces vary. For example, law enforcement is different across the Americas. Before 2001, American police forces were considerably sovereign. However, after the signage of the United States of America Patriot Act, the government established the Department of Homeland Security (Lyman & Potter, 2007). Through this, effective mergers of intelligence and assets of all the police forces took place. Similarly, the countries within Europe have fostered such organizational structures. The first framework, Europol, was created as a replica of America’s Federal Bureau of Investigation. Afterwards, the roles that the agency had to assume were extended based on the effect of globalization. Currently, Europol does not solely focus on considerable crimes such as drug trafficking, it also covers cyber crimes, terrorism and human trafficking.

Asiatic countries, however, lack a solid institution in terms of policing. Nevertheless, most of the agencies collaborate extensively with organizations based in the United States especially in chief crime operations. For example, states such as Japan, South Korea and Australia cooperate effectively with U. S. agents specifically in the resolution of major misdemeanors comprising organized crime factions located within most Asian countries. Concerning Africa, police agencies continue remaining sovereign. Interestingly, an organization dubbed the African Police Resource Network has attempted to assist the establishment of such organizations all over the African continue.

The varying nature of global criminal justice systems corresponds to the disparity evident in crimes committed globally. Such major crimes have imposed a significant effect on the framework and processes applied. For instance, the Holocaust influenced the establishment of treaties specifically meant to bring justice to perpetrators regardless of their nationality. Similarly, acts such as drug trafficking, which has led to the demises of nearly fifty thousand individuals in Mexico, have led to the establishment of organizations such as the United Nations Convention on Transnational Organized Crime (UNTOC) specifically meant to curtail intercontinental organized crime. Lastly, terror crimes such as the 9/11 Attacks committed in the United States and underage prostitution rings in the Philippines have influenced considerable cooperation between governments in order to curb such levels of organized crime (Lyman & Potter, 2007). To this end, the global criminal justice system has developed into a framework that consistently breaks physical boundaries. With the effect that globalization is imposing especially in establishing new forms of felonies, the United States criminal justice framework does possess any alternative to resolution than working cohesively with other countries in order to curtail the problem.


Lyman, M. D., & Potter, G. W. (2007). Organized crime. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.

Schmalleger, F. (2009). Criminology today: An interrogative introduction. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.

Calculate your order
275 words
Total price: $0.00

Top-quality papers guaranteed


100% original papers

We sell only unique pieces of writing completed according to your demands.


Confidential service

We use security encryption to keep your personal data protected.


Money-back guarantee

We can give your money back if something goes wrong with your order.

Enjoy the free features we offer to everyone

  1. Title page

    Get a free title page formatted according to the specifics of your particular style.

  2. Custom formatting

    Request us to use APA, MLA, Harvard, Chicago, or any other style for your essay.

  3. Bibliography page

    Don’t pay extra for a list of references that perfectly fits your academic needs.

  4. 24/7 support assistance

    Ask us a question anytime you need to—we don’t charge extra for supporting you!

Calculate how much your essay costs

Type of paper
Academic level
550 words

How to place an order

  • Choose the number of pages, your academic level, and deadline
  • Push the orange button
  • Give instructions for your paper
  • Pay with PayPal or a credit card
  • Track the progress of your order
  • Approve and enjoy your custom paper

Ask experts to write you a cheap essay of excellent quality

Place an order
Verified by MonsterInsights