Ancient Rome.
Name
Institution
Author’s note
Introduction
History has since time immemorial been used to inform our present and to predict the future. This is made possible by the world looking at its past. It is possible to analyze the decisions leading to events and thereby be able to make a better judgment in the presence and similarly anticipate the future in an informed manner. The debate on human civilization cannot hold without a candid discussion based on former cultures’ influences. From the time of the Greek rule to the rise of the Roman Empire, there lies a significant bulk of knowledge on criminal justice and criminal justice systems. For this reason, this paper will seek to explore the criminal justice journey from ancient Rome through time to the contemporary world while drawing an equal angle between the two times.
Lessons learned from ancient Rome.
The ancient roman republic, later empire, became the asymptote for most nations in the former world in terms of structure and composition. It is this structure that helped the country to rise to become a worldwide empire. The government structure in ancient Rome was divided into three arms. The three components were the legislative, the executive, and the judiciary. To understand Rome’s justice system, it is essential to evaluate some lessons from their government structure (Sanders, 2010).
The executive.
The executive branch of government in Rome, unlike in modern society, was made up of magistrates who ascended to power through election to office for one year. Although elected by the people, the magistrates had a fragmented authority, but at the same, their influence could hope. The executive branch’s primary responsibility was to exercise control over finances, the military and the justice system, and religious responsibilities. The executive was comprised of five officers with different roles. The officials’ roles were hierarchical in that they exercised control over varying levels of courts, from the lowest-ranked court to the highest.
The salient feature about Rome’s executive branch is that it controlled the judicial system more than the executive branch in the contemporary world. It is not worth mentioning that the magistrates were responsible for dispensing justice, and it was their duty to witness the metering out of punishment to those who were found guilty of several crimes. In later days during the Roman Empire’s rise, the crimes were expanded to include religious crimes. The main take away in the executive branch is that the executive had jurisdiction in judicial affairs.
The legislature.
The legislature enjoyed exercising power in several spheres in the Roman government. These roles included making appointments, making laws electing magistrates, and most importantly, the organ was also a form of a court, especially a senate. The fact that the organ had the privilege to sit in a court and influence justice raises questions on the process’s fairness. Secondly, it made the magistrates vulnerable to compromise since the same organ that selected them to the office could recall them at any time.
The judiciary.
The judicial system was comprised of the courts. Apart from the courts, there existed peripheral systems such as the republican trials conducted by private citizens and the praetor’s courts. However, the peripheral courts conducted different forms of cases and different magistrates. The other form of a court was the senate, which could hear cases that were considered peculiar. During the Roman Empire, the senate conducted trials on issues, for example, that involved treason and religion. The other major takeaway in the roman judicial systems was that the courts did not rely mostly on written laws, but instead, cases were tried based on the people’s customs. Due to this, there were many inconsistencies due to the lack of a central reference system that could offer guidance of describes crimes and propose the measures to be taken.
Therefore, from the above, it is to opine that the roman system of justice was vulnerable to influence from other forms of government since it lacked autonomy and independence. Likewise, the criminal justice system could easily be bent to become an open instead of a tool to dispense justice. This is validated by the fact that there lacked a laid down protocol that would describe the process of criminal justice from the point of arrest to the point where a verdict would be arrived at. Therefore, it was impossible to come up with a standard version of punishment since punishment could be influenced by the magistrate or the customs of the people. Thus, the criminal justice systems in the roman republic were a factor of societal expectation compared to a legal system product.
Concerning our contemporary world, the criminal justice system has been improved by paying attention to the judiciary and law enforcement agencies’ independence. To strengthen the system, different governments have come up with other units within the enforcement agencies tasked with offering service that is aimed at helping the judiciary dispense justice, for example, by conducting investigations on behalf of the bench. Secondly, the judiciary’s independence has been guaranteed in that the judiciary can work without being coerced either by the executive or the legislature. This has made it possible for the judicial systems to make landmark rulings and to be fair in its judgment. Concerning criminal justice, the courts’ independence has made it impossible for the other arms of government to use the judiciary as a muscle to crush people. Thirdly, the most important lesson is that there is the need to have standard procedures that can be referred to for there to be justice in criminal justice. Having a routine procedure means that a government has to come up with a document that contains the terms of reference and the different environments that constitute a crime.
Recent developments crime definition and acceptable punishment.
Crime in ancient Rome was defined as acting in violation of the kingly choice’s will (Riggsby, 2010). In his work, Andrew notes that in the Roman republic and later empire, the definition of what passes for a crime was mostly a product of the kingly will’s interpretation or how best the people in power, including the empire guard, interpreted the will. He further notes that the lack of a spelled out definition of crimes brought about a situation characterized by crime classified into mostly four categories. As it would follow, the punishment attributed to the violation was diverse and inconsistent, and it included lynching, banishment, formal sanctions, or trials, among others.
It is important to note that the author identifies four types of activities that were regarded as significant crimes and required a person to try. The four he notes are electoral bribery, murder, riot, and extortion (Riggsby, 2010).however in contemporary society, a crime has been defined in several ways. Among the available definitions of a crime include the following. Top on the list is that a crime is viewed as a breach of laws described by an authority. Secondly, a crime can be defined as a behavior that violates the prevailing cultural standards. On the other side criminalization is the process through which the society establishes measures used to decrease undesirable behavior to engage in conduct that may cause harm. The significant difference between the definition of crime in the past and the current world is that crime in the modern world has been institutionalized by documentation of what passes as a crime or an offense. As a result of this, punishment has also been institutionalized with the creation of correctional facilities and the introduction of community partnership in correcting behavior.
The establishment of alternative punishment such as community service is in sharp contrast with punishment forms in the previous world. Punishment in the former world was highly punitive and mostly discouraged the occurrence of behavior using eliminating the people found in violation of the law. In the current world, acceptable punishment is that punishment that exudes respect for human life and ensures that the person who has been convicted of a crime has been allowed to reform and get integrated back to society. Through rehabilitation programs, punishment, on the contrary world seeks to remedy behavior. It aims to understand the cause of the action through counseling to deal with the underlying factors that motivate unacceptable behavior.
From the above, it is evident that the significant steps in criminal justice in our contemporary world include defining a crime and establishing written rules that provide a working standard. The other significant development is the establishment of disciplinary goals that seek to change behavior and at the same time uphold the dignity of human life through acceptable punishment. The third monumental development in the criminal justice system is establishing alternative punishment such as community service, other alternative forms of punishment, as provided for in the existing legislation.
Cruel and unacceptable punishment in the contemporary world.
Cruelty in criminal punishment is also referred to as harsh justice. An analysis of the former world reveals that human rights were not given preference as shown in the current world. As such, the society was characterized by violence, which resulted in losing life in most cases. The lack of an existing written rule that world offer guidance made the situation worse in that the court system or the society could exercise justice in the way they saw best.
However, in the current civilization, human rights have been given a lot of prominences. This is validated because there has been the creation of organs responsible for making sure that human rights have been upheld in all spheres and governance. For this reason, some countries have found themselves on the receiving end of global retribution as a result of engaging in activities that are described as being barbaric. While in the past, death was a common form of criminal punishment, in the current world, it is seen as a barbaric act that has been outlawed in most countries apart from a few that still practice it. Secondly, there has been a differentiation between crimes and offenses, unlike when a person could face punishment for different crimes.
Therefore in the current world, any punishment that violates human rights is considered harsh and unacceptable, unlike in the Roman republic. The essence of punishment in the contemporary world is to rehabilitate the people who have been caught on the wrong side of the law while paying attention to the fact that they are human beings and deserve to be treated with the dignity that a human life demands.
Trends in criminal investigation.
There exist a very profound change in the way criminal investigations have changed in the current world. The most important aspect of this change is that there has been the creation of a prosecution body that works in close relation to other organs that have been mandated with the role of conducting investigations on behalf of the prosecution office. In a country like the United States, several agencies carry out analysis stating with the local police force to the FBI. All these are charged with conducting investigations so that the prosecution and the court can establish the facts related to a particular case.
In comparison, however, in ancient Rome, a formal prosecution body did not exist. This means that the presentation of a case relied on the participants, the court, and the social class that a person belonged to. Likewise, the court system relied heavily on public opinion, which was also based on the class system, meaning that the high-class members could bend justice to serve their purpose (Baurma, 2002). It also means that no formal investigations were carried out and that the presentation of evidence was based on the parties’ oral presentations. In his opinion, the author notes that the Romans’ attitude made it possible to interfere with justice since a case could only be argued based on the oral presentation. The unfortunate reality is that the strength of the evidence was reliant on a person’s social standing, for example, his class or achievements and his ability to command respect.
Compassion between tools and methods used in the past and the current world.
In the current world, technological advancement has made it possible to develop sophisticated tools to aid law enforcers in conducting their investigations. These devices range from the tools used to collect evidence to the tools used to store the proof and produce it. Similarly, technology has made it possible to develop better methods of investigation such as polygraphs. All this advancement has been monumental in the criminal justice system in that it has made it possible to reduce instances of wrongful conviction and unfair trial. Likewise, the discoveries have made it possible to accord the accused a level of comfort through better alternative means such as digital trials.
In comparison, the past lack of equipment that could present evidence, such as digital footage, made it easy for a person to be accused wrongly. Secondly, the lack of tools such as forensic tools made it impossible to vindicate a person since the trial and the conviction of such a person would be based on their word against the word of their accusers. The lack of better-interviewing techniques and interrogating skills opened a window where people would be tortured to give information as malicious people could use this opportunity to violate fellow human beings
‘ rights.
There is a big difference in the use of tools and techniques in criminal justice in the two eras. It is safe to opine that technological advancements have improved the criminal justice. It has been made easier to establish the truth using technology and maintain proceedings, thus reducing the chances of manipulating the justice system or using the system to achieve unethical purposes.
Impact of history on criminal justice in the contemporary world.
One of the importance of history is that it informs our present and helps us make better decisions that improve our lives. From history and as demonstrated through the paper, the world has evolved, especially in governance and justice systems by extension. Through history, society can look back at how issues were handled in the past and, as such, be in a position to make decisions that are aimed at improving what the former world was doing. For example, through history, we can learn that human rights were not considered to be as important as they are today in past. As a result, the criminal justice system was characterized by the violation of human rights and a situation where justice was a preserve for a few.
From such a lesson, therefore, the world gets an opportunity to appreciate the need to establish human rights bodies to ensure that the rights of men are not violated. Secondly, we learn through history that important institutions were absent, such as prosecuting bodies and investigative bodies in the previous world. For this lesson, therefore, as a contemporary society, we are prompted to come up with these bodies to ensure that justice is pursued and that the leadership does not misuse the justice system. In close connection, we learn that the independence of institutions is essential in ensuring that justice previous. As such, we are called to ensure that our organs are left to execute their independent mandate as enshrined in the constitution without interference from other government organs such as the executive and the parliament. In the same way, we learn that justice should be separated from politics.
The last and the most important lesson we get from history concerning criminal justice is that the essence of a criminal justice system is not nearly to punish the people but a tool that should be used to rehabilitate society. We learn that we should respect human life’s dignity by only engaging in rehabilitation measures that will help to reconcile the person who has been found in transgression of the law first with the community and secondly with the law itself. Similarly, we learn that for a criminal justice system to be effective, there should exist a formal written law to act as the standard.
References.
Sanders, A., Young, R., & Burton, M. (2010). Criminal justice. Oxford University Press.
https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C5&q=what+is+criminal+justice&btnG=#d=gs_cit&u=%2Fscholar%3Fq%3Dinfo%3AzCkMQI4B-3kJ%3Ascholar.google.com%2F%26output%3Dcite%26scirp%3D0%26hl%3Den
Riggsby, A. M. (2010). Crime and community in Ciceronian Rome. University of Texas Press.
https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C5&q=what+constituted+a+crime+in+ancient+rome&btnG=#d=gs_cit&u=%2Fscholar%3Fq%3Dinfo%3AvimfKey9y2AJ%3Ascholar.google.com%2F%26output%3Dcite%26scirp%3D8%26hl%3Den
Bauman, R. A. (2002). Crime and punishment in ancient Rome. Routledge.
https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C5&q=punishment+in+ancient+rome&oq=punishment+in+ancient+#d=gs_cit&u=%2Fscholar%3Fq%3Dinfo%3ANewIMYevlBcJ%3Ascholar.google.com%2F%26output%3Dcite%26scirp%3D0%26hl%3Den