Is Trial by Jury an Efficient and Just System Essay

Is Trial by Jury an Efficient and Just System - Essay Example Const., amend. VII). Many states have considered the right to a trial by jury so important that it is written into state constitutions as well (Saks). It is, therefore, not an exaggeration to say that the right to a trial by jury is considered a fundamental right of the American legal and judicial system. A trial by jury has its roots in Great Britain, where juries were used to provide protection against the harsh judgments of those that were in the favor of the King, and therefore handed down relatively harsh judgments for relatively small crimes (Graham, 2009). That system has grown, from Britain, to the United States, where in 2006 an estimated 154,000 jury trials were held nationwide (Mize, Hannaford-Agor & Waters, 2007). However, this does not mean that the system itself is perfect; indeed, if incarcerated criminals were questioned, most would likely say that the judicial system had not done what they hoped it would do. Trials by jury take time to put together, and can be expens ive to everyone involved (VanKoppen, 2009). Trials by jury also have the benefits, however, of fairness and impartiality, the bigger availability of resources, and because juries do not have the same concerns over image or power as a judge does. For these reasons, a trial by jury is an efficient and just system in proving guilt or innocence. One reason that trial by jury is an efficient and just system is that juries are chosen based on their ability to be impartial and fair towards the one who stands accused. This is proven during the jury selection, when both lawyers ask questions and ensure that each person impaneled on the jury can be fair and impartial during the trial (Saks). Potential jurors that have a problem with certain sets of circumstances, such as racism or even possibly voting for the death penalty in capital cases are dismissed (Saks). In this way, fairness towards the accused is ensured. In contrast, a judge must go through no such procedure. The role of a judge was created for the very reason of protecting an accused (Graham, 2009). It is taken for granted that a judge will be impartial; even though the Constitution does not say that a judge must be, it is the right of every American to enjoy such a privilege at trial (Siegel, 2010). However, this is not always the way that the judicial system works. Corruption is not unknown, and judges have, in the past, been bought or bribed to render decisions. Consider Operation Greylord, a Federal probe that exposed widespread corruption in the Cook County, Illinois court system in 1983 (Bogira, 2005). Judges had been found to be extorting money from prosecution and defense lawyers, as well as taking money directly in exchange for certain verdicts (Bogira, 2005). Had a jury trial been the route taken, instead of the judge being able to be bribed, twelve people would have had to be bribed or replaced. While it is true that jury tampering can certainly occur, it stands to reason that it is much harder to tamper with and convince twelve people to vote a certain way, as opposed to one judge. Juries, whether they are made up of six

Is judicial review consistent with democratic ideals Term Paper

Is judicial review consistent with democratic ideals - Term Paper Example For Marx and Engels, there is no supernatural being, only matter exists and as such, humans are alienated from material conditions. In this case, alienation is only eliminated when true freedom is achieved The first premise of this theory therefore, is the existence of living human individuals who then engage in economic activities for their subsistence and in the process develop relations that form the basis of legal and political superstructures. However, to achieve freedom societies go through conflicts or class struggles whereby the ruling class is overthrown and new order established. So according to the Communist manifesto by Marx and Engels â€Å"the history of all hitherto existing society is the history of class struggles.†1This struggle or historical process ends when man achieves true freedom through a socialist state or communism. The theory is well expounded in the Preface to A Contribution to the Critique of Political Economy written in 1859 by Marx. While this t heory has gained a lot of prominence over the years, it has been under scrutiny for decades owing to the failure of communism in the Twentieth Century such as in the Soviet Union and emergence of states that do not conform to Marx’s theory such as in China. The insistence on the role of economic forces in shaping history has also been disputed by sociologists over the years. Despite all these criticisms, it is apparent that historical materialism can withstand the test of time and continues to be relevant even today. This paper will discuss the primary features of the theory as an account of historical development and change. It will also evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of the theory in explaining historical development. To do this, I will utilize the works of Marx and Engels such as the German ideology, communist manifesto, a contribution to the critique of political economy and theory of surplus value. To understand the theory of historical materialism, it is essentia l to understand the theory upon which it is based and that is the dialectics by Geog Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel. Hegel was a German philosopher interested more on ideas as opposed to the reality thus the use of dialectical methods. This dialectical method is the foundation of Marxism. According to Hegel, there exists a supernatural being beyond the reach of human beings. Humans are separated from this supernatural or Absolute and can thus only perceive the world through economic and material lenses and reality is turned upside down by perceptions.2 According to Hegel, humans can only be reunited with the Absolute through a historical process and once they are reunited, it is the end of history. This progressive movement towards the Absolute is aided by the dialectical process which according to Shimp involves increasing awareness thus gradually replacing man’s perception of reality with newer and truer forms.3 For dialectical process to work there must be contradictions which he refers as thesis and antithesis. The thesis is higher in rank than the antithesis but in the process of competition, the antithesis overthrows the thesis and a new thesis or synthesis is achieved. The thesis and antithesis are not opposites in the real manner but are oppositions such as a master and servant and wherever there is a thesis, there must be an antithesis. As such, when a new thesis is established, a new antithesis emerges to compete with the thesis and the process