Introduction
Courts are bestowed specific powers by the constitution and other statutory authorities to administer justice. The system of courts is structured in a way that both the innocent and the guilty have a chance to be heard. The cardinal principle of law being that no one should be condemned unheard, it becomes essential for the rules of natural justice to be used. The aim of courts in many instances is to dispense the matter before them expeditiously, while putting into consideration the operational rules of courts. It should be remembered that functions of courts cannot be limited to determination of innocence and guilt only. There are other key functions in the dispute mechanism that depend upon courts’ decisions. In criminal law, determination of bail is solely a duty of a given court of law (Victor & Naughton, 2010). Holding of preliminary hearings that are cardinal in the process of attaining justice is a subject of court proceedings. The court at this stage listens to the grounds raised by the party intending to sue, and then it decides whether there is a cause of action.
Changes in the Functioning and Activities of the Courts
Several changes have been introduced today on the functioning and the operation of courts. It should be noted that the functioning of courts in the twenty first century is distinct from previous centuries. The advent of technology has had a great impact on the rules of admissibility of evidence. A growing concern is also witnessed in dealing with contracts and crimes committed by parties online. The nature of evidence in these cases takes a slightly distinct form. It can be challenging if a court is not well equipped to handle such matters (Victor & Naughton, 2010). This essay will focus on identifying current and future issues facing courts and court administrators today. In addition, an extensive discussion will be provided on future management, issues, as well as recent trends regarding language interpretation services.
There are many issues facing the courts system today. Courts have continuously used the plea of bargaining. The plea of bargaining has touched a substantial number of the cases disposed off annually. An estimate of ninety percent of all felonies committed are dealt with through plea bargaining. The corresponding charges in the law should be read in a situation whereby the accused has committed a crime. However, the plea of bargaining introduces a flexible room whereby the accused can take a plea of lesser charges. The plea has its advantages since it saves time and money. It should, however, be noted that it erodes the justice system by providing an unfair way of letting people get away with major felonies (Walker & Katz, 2008). It has been argued that people who commit the said crimes have knowledge of the charges, thus charging them with lesser offences is unjust. The guilty should be let to pay the price of the offences they have decided to commit.
Under the environment of the present day, it becomes clear that the competitive market pushes for the need to implement positive changes in the courts system. The duty of implementing the mentioned changes is vested on the court administrator, who should, from time to time, be responsible for evaluating the essence of the changes in the courts system. The duty of a court administrator in this case is more tasking than simply managing employees. Statistical analyses are inevitable for an administrator to effectively execute his or her duties. The responsibilities that are entrusted on the court administrator should be implemented to allow specific court guidelines to take effect. Management of cases and their flow is one that cannot be taken lightly since it forms a key part towards reaching a clear determination stage. The court administrator must be able to properly coordinate the employees in court to work as a team (Robinson, 2009).
The administrator should use the powers vested upon him or her to implement procedures that are likely to benefit the public. On the other hand, the procedures should be favorable to the court personnel. A good instance is the reforms implemented in the New York’s judicial system, whereby a solution to domestic violence cases was sought. At one point, domestic violence cases were overflowing and the administrator had to step up and contain the situation. The best option at the time was to create a special unit to deal with domestic violence cases, thus reducing the caseload substantially (Waller, 2009). The administrator should be alive to the anticipated expenses. The expenses that the court may incur in future should be the main point of consideration when the court’s duties are put into consideration. The administrator should be well grounded with essential skills to counter the developments in courts with a lot of ease.
The functional part of the courts systems is in the strict sense enhanced by the presence of a competent administrator (Waller, 2009). Regular review of the working environment is essential in maintaining the best work relations between judicial officers and other members of the society. It is worth observing that there are serious problems that face the courts system today. These include backlog, delay and congestion. The fact that interpretations can be done through the use of devices poses a major threat to the justice system. In most situations, courts will try to speed up the process, which may form a basis of many appeals. The very creation of courts is based on the fact they should work without any form of pressure. Many mistakes are made when courts work under pressure. Future challenges include having a judiciary whereby disputes are resolved in special courts designed to handle such cases. For instance, cyber crimes may be dealt with in a special court set up for that purpose only (Muraskin & Roberts, 2009).
Conclusion
The duty of the administrator in the justice administration system is very vital. The interpretations challenge has posed a problem that may not be ably addressed in the present circumstances. Delay of cases needs commitment from courts in order to deal with the issue with ease and efficiency. The major challenges that are faced by courts today and in the future directly point at the administrator’s ability to properly coordinate the working of the court. This entails setting up special court units to deal with matters expeditiously. Improvements in the justice system whereby many issues may need to be addressed in other avenues before they go to court can highly serve as a solution to the backlog issue. In the event that a person is not satisfied with the decision, they can seek courts redress. It is imperative to note that technology has introduced some problems, while solving others. It is, therefore, imperative to appreciate future challenges with intent of dealing with them sufficiently.
References
Muraskin, R., & Roberts. A. R. (2009). Visions for change: Crime and justice in the twenty-first century (5th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson/Prentice Hall.
Robinson, M. B. (2009). Justice blind? Ideals and realities of American criminal justice (3rd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson/Prentice Hall.
Victor, J. L. & Naughton, J. (2010). Annual editions: Criminal justice. New York, NY: McGraw Hill.
Walker, S., & Katz, C. M. (2008). The police in America: An introduction (6th ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
Waller, B. N. (2009). You decide! Current debates in criminal justice. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson/Prentice Hall.