Subcomponents in the United States Compared to France, Russia, and South Africa
Like many criminal justice subcomponents, the United States’ police, courts, and corrections maintain commonalities throughout that contribute to its successes as well as its inefficiencies. Police, courts, and corrections are all handed down policies and laws to uphold and follow, sometimes from elections and sometimes from legislation. Police are the first interaction with individuals who enter the criminal justice system, followed by courts who interpret the law and carry it out, and corrections who uphold the sentence handed down by the court.1 This relationship creates ripples not just upward or downward, but back and forth.
Tough on crime policies in the United States historically created a direct impact on courts and corrections as offenders move through the system, creating court backlogs and overpopulated prisons. As a result, America’s incarceration rate is high, even compared to that of Russia and South Africa.2 Additionally, politics and courts also contribute to increased arrests with the adoption of decreased judicial discretion and enacting minimum sentencing, further contributing to overpopulated prisons. The fundamentals of states’ rights upon which America was founded also contribute to the problem of a decentralized, uncoordinated system of command between the various law enforcement agencies at local, state, and federal levels.3 France also has two courts: administrative and ordinary courts, with the Tribunal des Conflits deciding jurisdiction when necessary. Ordinary courts have purview over both civil and criminal services, in which all cases go to trial rather than allowing for plea bargaining.
Subcomponents in England and Wales, United Kingdom
The United Kingdom has three criminal justice systems due to agreements with Northern Ireland and Scotland.4 England and Wales’ common law based criminal justice system will be examined here. Likely due to America’s origins, England and Wales’ criminal justice subcomponents look very similar to that of the United States. An offender first interacts with the police, the police subsequently investigate the crime, the case will go to court if charges are filed, an option is given to plea, and if found guilty, the offender will interact with the correctional system.5
The centralized and coordinated aspects of the criminal justice system, such as the Crown Prosecution Service, oversee what cases go to trial and which do not. Her Majesty’s Courts, tasked by the Ministry of Justice, governs criminal, civil, and family courts within England and Wales. Two courts exist depending on severity of the crime: Magistrates Courts at the lower level, and the Crown Court, overseeing cases such as rape, murder, and robbery.6 An appeals court does exist, but should the appeal fail, the offender will be required to enter the corrections subcomponent, whether through community service, probation, or incarceration, with rehabilitative services also offered to prevent recidivism.
Subcomponents in France
France utilizes a legal system with origins stemming from Roman law and codified laws, creating an inquisitorial system for court proceedings.7 France offers two police forces, one for rural, less populated areas, called Gendarmerie Nationale, and one for larger metro areas, called the Police Nationale. Like other countries employing the inquisitorial system, France seeks to limit needless litigation, offering instead procedures to save everyone involved time.
As a result, low level courts exist at the police level, giving more responsibility and leeway for offenders to avoid a correctional trial at a higher level of court. Trials are not utilized, and instead one or more judges decide upon the defendant’s fate after considering all evidence. An appeals court exists to hear appeals from both police and correctional court criminal cases. Should an appeal fail, there is a Supreme Court of Appeals for one last review.8
The Relationship Between Police, Courts, and Correctional Subcomponents
Several connections and impact points exist for the three subcomponents of the criminal justice system. First, law and order to be carried out by police will impact the court system. Should a government require police to arrest additional offenders due to new or strict laws, such as that mentioned above in America, more offenders will move through the criminal justice system.
Courts may also impact corrections and the number of incarcerated individuals through offering early release opportunities, reducing the burden on the correctional system, or alternatively, requiring lifetime incarceration.9 Correctional facilities may also impact the police and potentially court subcomponents should they fail to address factors that could lead an offender toward recidivism. Most importantly, impropriety, misconduct, or perceived miscarriage of justice at one level may impact trust in the entire system.10
This interdependence is not theoretical. In Barry County, Michigan, documented judicial misconduct at the court level has eroded public trust, delayed corrections-level outcomes through stalled appeals, and created documented burdens on attorneys operating at every stage of the system. The ripple runs in every direction.
In Conclusion
Though each of the above countries employ nuances in the administration of their police, courts, and corrections, they also share several commonalities. The inextricable bond between these systems intends to create a check and balance, ensuring that justice is served in the most fair and complete way as possible. Along with it, comes impacts to one another, which must be balanced delicately to ensure none of the three subcomponents becomes overwhelmed and faces inefficacy, or worse yet, collapse.
The United States stands out in this comparative analysis not because its three subcomponents are structured differently in theory, but because policy decisions have systematically overwhelmed two of them. Mandatory minimums and tough-on-crime legislation pushed the courts past their capacity to exercise discretion, and pushed corrections past its physical capacity to house people. When the check-and-balance design of the system is defeated by the volume it is asked to process, the result is the highest incarceration rate in the developed world. This is not a failure of the structure. It is a failure of the policy choices made within it.
- Bureau of Justice. (2021, June 3). The justice system. Bureau of Justice Statistics. https://bjs.ojp.gov/justice-system
- Adelman, L. (2017). How Congress, the U.S. Sentencing Commission, and Federal Judges Contribute to Mass Incarceration. Litigation, 44(1), 8–11.
- Reichel, P. L. (2018). Comparative criminal justice systems: A topical approach (7th ed.). Pearson.
- Courts and Tribunals Judiciary. (n.d.). The justice system and the constitution. https://www.judiciary.uk/…
- Dorset Criminal Justice Board. (n.d.). Follow a journey through the criminal justice system. dorset.police.uk/media/1467/cjb_flow_chart.pdf
- Government of United Kingdom. (2015, May 27). Criminal courts. GOV.UK. https://www.gov.uk/courts
- Ministrie De La Justice. (2012, November). The French Legal System. justice.gouv.fr/art_pix/french_legal_system.pdf
- Georgetown University. (2020, October 28). French Legal Research Guide: The layout of the French legal system. Georgetown Law Library. guides.ll.georgetown.edu →
- Louthan, W. C. (1974). Relationships among police, court, and correctional agencies. Policy Studies Journal, 3(1), 30–37. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1541-0072.1974.tb01124.x
- Berthelot, E. R., McNeal, B. A., & Baldwin, J. M. (2018). Relationships between Agency-Specific Contact, Victimization Type, and Trust and Confidence in the Police and Courts. American Journal of Criminal Justice, 43(4), 768–791.
