Since the advent of the 21st century, state governments have enacted several sweeping changes in regard to laws and policies that have profoundly affected the juvenile justice system in the United States. This special court has been challenged and shaped by numerous factors in the course of its delivery of justice to the minors. Arguably, the juvenile court of the future will be identified with the trends which largely shows the possibility of elimination of some of its delinquency functions since more jurisdiction over youth criminality will be transferred to the adult criminal system (Balakrishnan, Hansaria & Jose 2010, p.234). However, one of the most persistent and major aspect of the juvenile system that will greatly define the future of this court is with regard to the approach in punishing offenders. This paper seeks to explain whether or not the future juvenile system should be based primarily on the crime control model or the due process control model during administering punishment to the minors.
The principal layout that informs the prediction for the future juvenile system is the United States Criminal justice process model according to Herbert Packer. In his influential book The Limits of the Criminal Sanction, Packer describes the justice process under two systems namely: The crime control model and the due process model. The crime control model has been explained by packer to being the vital function of the criminal justice system to deter and to punish criminal conduct. Crime control model is based on the assumption of absolute reliability on the law enforcers fact-finding and also is known to treat the arrestees as if they are already found guilty (Cole, Smith, & DeJong, 2013, p.72). The major concept which guides the crime control model is “a presumption of guilt”, it argues that if a person has been arrested, then they must be guilty. Since its fundamental assertion is that the repression of crime should at all the times be the key function of the criminal justice, it ends up concentrating on the notion of vindicating the victims’ rights and totally ignoring the protection of the defendants’ rights. In addition it proposes that the police powers are supposed to be expanded so as to make it easier to investigate, conduct searches, arrest, seize and convict (Cole, Smith, & DeJong, 2013, p.81).
On the other hand, the due process model is meant to safeguard the offender’s rights by assuring them of fair treatment during whole judicial process. The due process model is based on the belief that an individual cannot be deprived of his life, property or liberty without the appropriate legal safeguards and procedures (Balakrishnan, Hansaria & Jose 2010, p.235). Therefore, any individual that has been charged with a particular crime is required to have all their rights protected by the relevant criminal justice laws and policies. Since this model was designed by packer as a counterproposal to the conservative crime control model, its major function is to provide the fundamental fairness in the criminal justice process. Additionally, it argues that the criminal justice should concentrate more on the rights of the defendant instead of focusing more on the victim’s rights since the Bill of rights has expressly provided for the protection of the accused rights. The police powers are therefore supposed to be very limited according to this model so that official oppression of the defendant by the law enforcers can be prevented.
In light of the description of the two criminal justice models, to declare the best model that would define the future of the juvenile justice system requires one to make an in-depth value judgment. It becomes apparent that the crime control model greatly reflects the conservative values while on the other hand the due process appears to reflect liberal values. For many years, the crime control model has been the dominant approach in the criminal judicial system whereby the defendants’ rights were being totally ignored while favoring the complainant. If the future of the juvenile justice system adopts or increasingly reflects on the policies and principles of the crime control model, then fewer limitations in regard to how the police punish the minor defendants will be observed in their endeavor to combat crime. This means that there will be more intrusions in the future into the defendants’ lives especially being facilitated by advancement in electronic surveillance. On the other hand, if the principles and models shits towards the due process model, the young criminal offenders will be more protected by the juvenile justice system and therefore their punishment will be controlled (Balakrishnan, Hansaria & Jose 2010, p.233). The police and other enforcement authority will become more limited in punishing and combating criminal activities.
In conclusion, it is evident that both models have their respective advantages and disadvantages and therefore non can completely control the juvenile criminal justice. In fact, the model that dominates the general justice policy in the United States at any particular time largely depends on the prevailing political climate. Nonetheless, I am of the opinion that the due process model is a more effective approach and should be the primary basis at which punishment is determined since it respects the rights of the accused by ensuring that they are presumed innocent until when they are pronounced guilty.
References
Cole, G. F., Smith, C. E., & DeJong, C. (2013). The American system of criminal justice.
Balakrishnan, K. G., Hansaria, V., & Jose, P. I. (2010). Juvenile justice system: Along with
Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000 and rules, 2007: working manual for stake holders. New Delhi, India: Universal Law Pub. Co.
