Kialo requires cookies to work correctly.
Does Crime Control (Speedy Justice) trump Due Process?
Crime Control (Speedy Justice) trumps Due Process.
Given budget restraints, speedy justice is the only justice we can afford.
Speedy justice works in favour of the victims as it gives the offender punishment (whether real or just perceived). In this way, speedy justice is victim-centred justice.
Defendants often find the process to be a punishment in and of itself. Therefore by having faster processing, rather than cumbersome human rights, speedy justice works in defendants' best interests.
In Youth Justice in particular, interventions work best when the plans to address offending are put in place within a short time frame. This increases accountability and offender participation.
Youth justice timeframes
Justice delayed is justice denied. By emphasising speedy justice, the concept of justice is upheld.
Our current justice system is designed after decades of prosecution having to 'prove beyond reasonable doubt'. This system is not compatible with crime control.
Due process trumps crime control. Limited resources is directly related to faulty management of resources. Norway's prison system is an example of wise use of resources where due process isn't compromised.
Due Process ensures that those who are innocent but are unable to articulate it are guaranteed justice, such as those whose first language is not English, or those with mental disabilities. By prioritising Crime Control (speedy justice), justice is denied to these vulnerable demographics.
It is absolutely morally wrong to design a system that opens up the possibility that it will convict an innocent individual for the sake of financial gain / savings.
Due process works to ensure that issues of racism, ablism and other forms of discrimination are mitigated against throughout the justice system.
Do gun control laws reduce crime?
Should prisons exist?
How should society deal with convicted pedophiles?