Law enforcement and courts

The peace and order of society can be traced to the efficiency of the Criminal Justice system in the State. “U.S. President William Howard Taft declared two or three years ago that American criminal procedure is so defective and so far behind that of other countries as to be a disgrace to the nation and in some respects his criticism of matters connected with the U.S. civil procedure was only less harsh than this” (“Improving the Judiciary”).

It has been settled that the major components of the criminal justice system are Law Enforcement, The Judiciary and the System of Corrections. An analysis of the abovementioned components are necessary in order to determine how the interaction between two of said components, The Judiciary and Law Enforcement, can be improved and developed for the next fifteen years.

Law enforcement involves the implementation of the laws and the task of tracking down law offenders. Once the law offenders are caught, the process of prosecution then follows. The determination of the guilt of the accused will be determined by the Judiciary and the penalty to be imposed as a measure for correction shall likewise be pronounced by the Court. It appears that in the field of Criminal Justice System, important roles are played by the law enforcement agencies and the courts. Hence, the interaction between the two must be analyzed and scrutinized.

As Law enforcement is tasked with tracking down violators of the law, the manner of their investigation must be exercised with reasonableness. The findings of law enforcers are the basis for prosecution and hence, it is necessary that said findings must not be tainted with abuse or falsity. There are cases where innocent people have been falsely accused as a result of investigations infected with abuse and negligence. For an orderly administration of the criminal justice system, it must be imperative that law enforcement agencies handle investigation with care and attention.

The guilt of the accused will ultimately be settled before the Judiciary. It is the body which shall determine whether or not the guilt of the accused has been proven beyond reasonable doubt. Most of the times, the findings of the law enforcers are given great weight by the Court in the course of the trial.

This cannot be so since the Judiciary must act and decide independently in hearing matters brought before it. It cannot solely rely on the findings of law enforcers, but rather, it must make an independent judgment as to the guilt of the accused. A great amount of discretion is given to the Judiciary, considering that the life and liberty of the accused depend on its pronouncements, and hence, said discretion must not be arbitrarily exercised.

For the next fifteen years, a number of new criminal laws will be promulgated, and hence a lot of work is in store for both the law enforcers and the courts. In order to improve the interaction between the two, it is imperative that abuse must not be exercised in investigating a criminal matter and that when it comes to the determination of the guilt of the accused, the Judiciary must act independently of the findings forward to it by the law enforcement agencies. Through this kind of relative independence, the interactions between said two factors can be harmonized and improved. Ultimately, said improvement will reflect on the development of the Criminal Justice System of the State.


Improving the Judiciary. 2007. <>

Criminal justice. 2007. In Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. <>

Justice System. <>