A Comparative Analysis of Opinions Regarding American Justice Administration

Introduction:

The American legal system is a complicated and diverse system made up of numerous

institutions, stakeholders, and procedures. The justice system has been viewed from a variety of

angles by academics and professionals; some have called it a non-system, others a network, and

still others a process. With information from the book "Justice Administration Police, Courts, &

Corrections Management" by Kenneth J. Peak and Andrew L. Giacomazzi (2018), this essay

seeks to examine and contrast these various points of view.

I. The Non-System View:

According to the non-system viewpoint, there is no consistent strategy used to administer

justice in the United States. According to this viewpoint, the legal system functions as a

collection of distinct, independent entities, each with its own objectives, norms, and cultures

(Peak & Giacomazzi,2018). These organizations, like police forces, courts, and prisons,

frequently run independently of one another, which results in fragmentation and inefficiency.

The absence of coordination and communication between various bodies, which leads to a

fragmented and inconsistent approach to justice administration, is highlighted by the non-system

view.

Peak and Giacomazzi emphasize the fragmented nature of justice agencies and the

difficulties it creates in order to highlight the non-system approach. They contend that criminal

justice institutions frequently work in isolation and share little information (Peak &

Giacomazzi,2018). The exchange of information, the coordinating of activities, and the pursuit of
common objectives can all be hampered by this isolation. The non-system approach contends

that this lack of integration in judicial administration results in less than ideal results and public

unhappiness.

II. The Network View:

The network perspective sees the administration of justice as a network of numerous

individuals and organizations that are interrelated and dependent on one another, in contrast to

the non-system approach (Leverenz,2019). This viewpoint acknowledges that a variety of

stakeholders, including law enforcement agencies, courts, correctional facilities, community

organizations, and social service providers, are involved in the administration of justice. The

network view indicates that various organizations cooperate to address the intricate problems of

crime, punishment, and rehabilitation.

Peak and Giacomazzi emphasize the value of alliances and cooperation in the

administration of justice as they talk about the network view. They contend that the need for

cooperation and resource sharing across justice organizations is becoming more and more

apparent. In order to improve the efficacy and efficiency of justice administration, this viewpoint

emphasizes the significance of interagency cooperation, information sharing, and coordination.

This perspective seeks to address the problems of fragmentation and encourage a more integrated

approach to justice administration by highlighting the networked aspect of the justice system

(Leverenz,2019).

III. The Process View:

 The procedural elements of the justice system are the main emphasis of the process view

of justice administration. The formalized and sequential steps in the administration of justice,

such as the arrest, arraignment, trial, and sentencing, are highlighted from this perspective. The

process viewpoint places a strong emphasis on the value of fairness, compliance with the law,

and due process.

Peak and Giacomazzi underline the value of procedural fairness in the administration of

justice in order to examine the process view. They contend that the defense of individual rights,

procedural fairness, and the treatment of all parties equally should be given top priority by justice

institutions (Grassa,2013). The procedural approach acknowledges the significance of

accountability, consistency, and transparency in preserving the public's faith in the legal system.

This viewpoint aims to make sure that the system functions fairly and impartially by placing an

emphasis on the procedural components of justice administration.

Comparison and Contrast:

Although the non-system, network, and process viewpoints present various angles on

how justice is administered, they do not conflict with one another. In actuality, these viewpoints

can support and reinforce one another. The network view emphasizes the significance of

collaboration and interagency cooperation to overcome these obstacles, whereas the non-system

view emphasizes the difficulties of fragmentation and a lack of coordination. While offering a

framework for ensuring fairness and accountability within the system, the process view, on the

other hand, focuses on the procedural components of justice administration (Grassa,2013).

 In conclusion, the non-system view, network view, and process view may all be used to

understand how justice is administered in the United States. While each viewpoint provides

distinct insights into how the justice system functions, a thorough understanding necessitates

understanding how these viewpoints are interconnected. The administration of justice can be

made more efficient and fairer by acknowledging the fragmented nature of the judicial system's

agencies, encouraging cooperation and information exchange, and maintaining procedural

fairness.
 References

Grassa, R. (2013). Shariah supervisory system in Islamic financial institutions: New issues and

challenges: A comparative analysis between Southeast Asia models and GCC

models. Humanomics, 29(4), 333-348.

Leverenz, K. T. (2019). A Tale of Four Cities: Evaluating the Impact of Assessment Centers on

Police Promotion Processes by Rank, Sex, and Race.

Peak, K. J., & Giacomazzi, A. L. (2018). Justice Administration Police, Courts, & Corrections

Management. Pearson.