If we assess the problems with administrating justice and sentencing within a democratic context, then these issues pale into insignificance when compared to those which concern punishment rehabilitation. The reason for this is that any prison sentence or consequence that is passed down within a democratic rule must be dual purpose, and need to provide a delicate balance between legitimate punishment and rehabilitating the perpetrator.
It is this balance which epitomizes a slight weakness within the armory of democracy, as it attempts to serve as many citizens as possible and in a vast number of individual ways. This aspiration is integral to the ideal of democracy, but it can occasionally create a situation where an individual goal or target can fall short of expectations. In terms of rehabilitation, this means that where a prison environment Is too lenient, a criminal is neither encouraged to repent or reform for their misdemeanors.
Can Punishment and Rehabilitation be Carried out Simultaneously?
This raises an interesting point with regards to the separate entities of punishment and rehabilitation, and whether they can be carried out simultaneously. Although they are individual concepts in their own right, they are closely linked in terms of their relationship and relevance to a perpetrator of crime, and any punishment administered must be harsh enough to provoke thought, remorse and ultimately a desire to reform. Where this punishment fails to be efficient,
Of all the aspects of a democracy that create debate and consternation, the approach to justice and criminal rehabilitation is one of the more significant. This is chiefly because it has a definitive impact on the well being and security of society, in addition to accounting for a large sum of tax revenue and government expenditure, and also challenges the important issues of morality amongst a nation’s citizens. This not only applies to the morality of the perpetrators of crime, but also the methodology used in administering justice.
There are many different approaches to crime and punishment across the globe, from those based upon democratic principles to others that are primitive and often reflective of a totalitarian rule. The US largely adheres to the former, although some states within the countries boundaries do still employ capital punishment as a consequence of specific types of crime. While the democratic model of justice is one that reflects the best balance of morality and rehabilitation, there are issues with originate from it’s core values.
Admitting Guilt and Reduced Sentencing
As aspect of this is reduced sentencing in exchange for a guilty plea, which remains a feature of existing law regardless of the severity of a crime or its moral implications. This is a longstanding pivot upon which justice veers, and allows perpetrators of crime to escape from the maximum punishment allowed by law through a simple and public admission of their guilt. While this is seen as a partial act of acceptance and also saves crucial tax payers money designated for a trial, the question remains as to whether it has become a largely cynical deed rather than a humanitarian one.