Learn To Craft Critical Thinkings On Factors That Influence Criminal Law With This Example

Criminal law as any other system of law is subject to changes. The nature of these changes is fully dependent on the broader context of the state versus society relationships.
What is of a particular interest to us in the paper are factors that cause criminal law alteration. Among the major ones we can cite the following factors: lobbyists, media, the individual citizens and criminal justice agencies. Let us go into detail on the question of how the mentioned constituents of the legal process really bring about the major changes.
Lobbying can be defined as acts of people, associations or any other social groups attempted at impacting decisions made by legislators, courts, etc. Lobbying can be even professional, that is lobbyists can be employed on a regular basis by the company, for example. The purpose of professional lobbyists in this case is to sue on the behalf of the company. On the other hand, even individuals can lobby.
However, there has been an increasing controversy about lobbying both on the part of governmental institutions and people. It’s been predominantly seen that the ethics of lobbyists is double-edged, their purpose too often to twist a law.
The powerful factor in shaping public opinion plays media. In this respect media exerts tremendous influence on the criminal law since it is through media that the voices are heard. The power of media is so high that it is even sometimes referred to as the fourth branch of law.
However, it is worth exaggerating the real potential of media to bring about changes. Though media have a tremendous resonance, the practice shows that media tend to be under the ruling circles’ sway not only in authoritarian states but in certain cases in democratic ones as well.
If both media and lobbyists usually form a social institution, or in other words, represent interests of a group of people, it is an individual that has to struggle an uphill battle for justice. It is very well when the individual is an influential person having a ‘pull at court’, but the practice shows that it is predominantly enthusiasm on the part of voiceless individuals that can cause the justice to work a little bit more effectively.
The main obstacle between the individual and the criminal justice is red tape and corruption. The purpose of both is to conserve the existing system of law however rigid and unfair it might be. The purpose of an individual is too often is to break through the obstacle, through this wall and to assert one’s rights. If this takes a place, it already causes a perturbation inside the legal system.
Despite the fact that every of the above discussed factors should be reckoned with, it goes without saying that it is criminal justice agencies that usually submit initiatives for changes. Furthermore, their initiatives are usually carefully considered even if declined.
The reason for this paradoxical situation is that criminal justice agencies have an absolute discretion to exercise their legislative powers, while people though in most states it is they that are entitled to power, have no such leverages. Furthermore, criminal justice agencies are as a rule amalgated with the state, and it is well-known that the main function of the state is a legislative one.