Courts have existed on the face of the earth for centuries, both formally and informally. Like any other institutions, these organizations which serve justice to the citizens have been faced by diverse challenges. As the dynamics of the world change, the issues faced also mutate with time bringing forth new problems. Courts are part of the judicial arm of governance of a civilized country, and for it to achieve and meet the expectations, justice must not only be done but seen to be achieved.
This brings forth the expectations of the community within which a court exists. The world today is in the information age and in most states and countries of the world, access to information is a basic right. This means that people have more knowledge about the laws that govern them at different levels, be they national or local. The result is high expectations on the courts in the delivery of verdicts. Due to the presidencies set in other courts, whose judgments are accessible to the larger populace, more is also expected. In the event that the benchmarks set are not attained, in view of the population, the administrators have an uphill task in restoring confidence in the institutions they head.
The victims in most of the nations have a right to get the full judgment in whatever form so as to ascertain that the ruling was fair. In cases where the victims are in large numbers, the administrators may have distribution challenges. When the jurisdiction covered by the court is not technologically advanced, hard copy distribution of verdicts may be logistically challenging to the administrators. If they decide to do it electronically in such cases, the confidence of the victims may my eroded since, they may perceive it to be an injustice. In the past, when the rights to access of information had not been ratified in most states, this would not have been a problem, because what is read by the jury would have been considered sufficient. The future may potent a bigger challenge since judgments may need to be streamed live on television and over the internet so as to meet the requirements.
In the past, suspects could be held in police cells for many days before being arraigned in court. This has since changed and in most states, they have to be presented within twenty four hours of arrest. It puts pressure on the judicial systems to engage in thorough research within a very short time and deliver rulings. Consequently, the courts have to employ many researchers and clerks so as to realize this. For the administrators, it poses a budget problem, especially in the current economic setting (Ellis, Goldstone, & Goldstone, 2008).The money provided to the institution is lean therefore; a lot of balancing has to be done which may ultimately lower the morale of the officers due to minimal pay.
The reduced time of arraigning suspects in court also means that shifts have to be devised, so that the institution can operate twenty four hours a day. Many workers have to be employed so as to achieve this. Due to financial constraints, this may not be achievable leading to delayed verdict which is considered in law to be a denial of justice. The administrators are faced with such a challenge currently in some of the states. Certainly, this will continue into the future.
The right to life is a basic human right, as articulated in the United Nations charter (United Nations, n.d.). Some of the cultures and religions in the world believe that a similar punishment should be imposed, considering the alleged crime. It mainly applies in cases where murder is involved. This conflicts with the current laws that govern the world. No one should be sentenced to death in most parts of the world. If the religious believes are not satisfied by the judgments, the courts face the risk of rejection by the population they serve.
Globalization has made the world to virtually shrink and be like a village. A person born in one corner of the world can travel and work or live on another part of the world. This is a trend which was not very common in the past, because the world was not as interconnected as it is today. Again, the internet has made it possible for one to commit a crime while in a very distant place. Hacking, information theft and monetary fraud have been the common crimes people are involved in (Yackle, 1999). When such crimes are committed, the suspect may have to be arraigned in a foreign land to be tried. Language barriers exist and this leads to delay and complexity in handling the case. The one who committed the crime may have their origin in small ethnic group of people whose language is not well known to the world. Such cases are hard to handle since getting an interpreter may requires a government-to-government negotiation, which delays the delivery of justice to the alleged criminal.
Globalization also means that human recourses are available from all areas of the world. The result is that workers who do not indigenously speak the language of the jurisdiction they are working in may be employed. They may be well trained in the language but miss out on the actual meaning of some of the things due to semantics. Words may acquire new meaning due to change in the tone applied, and this lead to misinterpretation by court officials who are not native speakers of the language. Consequently, justice is perverted and may set a bad precedence or erode the confident of the people concerning the system (Yackle, 1999).
Advancements in technology have brought with them improved translation machines. More powerful equipment for this job exists today. People have become very dependent on them especially in the international courts and tribunals. They serve to bridge to the language barrier among all the participants. However, these facilities may stall cases in situations where they malfunction. In the event of a total failure, it may take days for an overhaul of the system to take place. It may result to tensions and perceptions of unfairness on the part of the court and its administrators (Ellis, Goldstone, & Goldstone, 2008).
Some languages are not catered for in translation equipment owing to the small number of speakers. This may bring forth unrest in cases where the victims or suspected criminals speak that language. They may claim unfairness in the execution of justice on their part. It becomes a challenge for the administrator to prove their fairness in such situations. Such cases have in the past seen the availing of a human translator on the court floor, so as to win the confidence of the minorities.
Conclusion
The pace at which globalization is happening warrants the court administrators to be dynamic since, the challenges are bound to change rapidly. Introduction of online delivery of verdicts may reduce the cost especially where the participants are in different parts of the world. This would minimize on the budgets involved and other logistical difficulties. The court’s operations should also be ready to accommodate the varying rights of the suspects and the victims for justice to be served in an expeditious manner. If all these are taken into account, confidence from the citizens would also be enhanced leading to widespread supports of the court activities and verdicts.
References
Ellis, M., Goldstone, R., & Goldstone R., J. (2008). The International Criminal Court:
Challenges to Achieving Justice and
Accountability in the 21st Century. New York:
International Debate Education
United Nations. (n.d.). The universal declaration of human rights. Retrieved from
http://www.un.org/en/documents/udhr/index.shtml
Yackle, L. (1999). Federal courts. California: University of California.
