The Importance Of Integrity In Justice

Decent Essays
Integrity is an important factor in determining a judge’s ability to fulfill their judicial duties. The integrity of a judge relies substantially on their ability to uphold ethical standards, especially in difficult or controversial situations. Depending on the circumstances, some actions qualify as either ethical or unethical. However, there are some actions are always considered unethical regardless of the circumstance. Defining the ethical nature of some common practices helps to maintain a judge’s integrity.
One of the most common unethical practices in any profession is the use of organizational resources for personal gains. Instances of such occurrence are always unethical despite the organization or the setting. As a result, judges
…show more content…
Any actions contrary to this would jeopardize the integrity of the judicial system. In court rulings, impartiality is observed by providing each side an opportunity to present their arguments without placing unlawful limits to them (Shatreet, 2015). In relation, judges are allowed to declare defense or prosecution lawyers in contempt of the court based on unruly behavior. Otherwise, judges have no authority to prevent defense lawyers from presenting valid arguments and evidence to the court. A judge who bans a defense lawyer from speaking in court is acting unlawfully and preventing the establishment of impartiality in the court proceedings. According to the codes of conduct that judges abide by, such an act is unethical. On the same issue, it is notable that a judge who shuts the court down with the intention of preventing a defendant from filing a plea is in violation of both the law and ethical standards. In such an incidence, the judge would be obstructing justice as well as failing to uphold the impartiality requirement of all judicial proceedings.
Other than being impartial, the judicial proceedings should be free of influence by any outside party. The rulings that a court makes should have a firm foundation on the evidence presented in court (Shatreet, 2015). It is for this reason that accepting payments or gifts with the objective of influencing the ruling of a court is both unlawful and unethical. For example, a judge who accepts payments for sending a certain amount of teenagers to a juvenile detention facility is acting unlawfully. Such an act can result in severe punishment for both the judge and the parties offering the

Related Documents

  • Decent Essays

    Additionally, he would allow the state to prohibit the distribution of photographic pornography involving minors as subjects, because they could not have made a voluntary and rational choice to consent and their exploitation should not be encouraged by allowing their exploiters to benefit from what can constitute criminal activity. Additionally, Richards would allow for “reasonable regulation” of obtrusive distribution of the obscene, in order to protect the liberty of persons who would otherwise not wish to be exposed to it. Outside of these restrictions, Richards would allow for the state to apply temporary restrictions or repressed expression when necessary to protect the system of equal liberties, rather than to make these restrictions permanent by turning them into…

    • 798 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    The Substantive Due Process Clause keeps the government from violating certain fundamental constitutional rights of individuals or parties. The Supreme court relied on the Substantive Due Process clause to overturn the previous courts ruling and argued that the ruling violated the S. Due Process Clause, as opposed to the Equal Protections Clause. However, Justice Sandra Day O ' Connor argued in favor of the Equal Protections Clause to overturn the state laws against sodomy. The Court recognized that the privacy rights of consenting adults cannot be violated as this violates the Constitution. You would first file a complaint with the court and deliver a copy to the defendant.…

    • 972 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    The use of discretion within a zealous defense is normally a bit more debatable amongst defense counsels and the prosecution. Discretion could possibly cross the parameters of ethics when defense counsels are presenting a zealous defense. A zealous defense can be portrayed as the defense counsel displaying diligence and loyalty to their client regardless of the nature of the case. “The principle that every defendant is entitled to a zealous defense in court is one that should never be compromised” (Thoreau). For instance, it is unlawful for any defense attorney to illegally represent a client by suppressing evidence that should be made available to all parties, or by equivocating evidence or compelling their clients to do so.…

    • 1910 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    During any criminal proceeding, the law can either help win the case or lose the case. Every case is unique, whether it is a murder case or a simple assault case. This is why clients need skilled, knowledgeable attorney 's so that they can receive fair trials without police and investigators introducing evidence which may be illegally seized during an arrest. The judge has the ultimate decision whether evidence should be excluded or not, so bringing forth the Constitutional Rights of one 's client is pertinent. Judge Doe is excluding evidence during trial yet the prosecution asked the judge for an Evidentiary Hearing so they can argue their case on why the evidence should be allowed.…

    • 1291 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    Defendants can use pre-trial motion to eliminate evidence or not being used against them if they think it does not apply to their particular case. Defendants can use pre-trial motion to suppress evidence if they do not believe it applies in the particular case being held in court against them. The individual has the chance to appeal the case if that evidence that he/she requested to be thrown out at pre-trial is used to convict them (Lombardo, 2015). In the event that the accused is granted an appeal, nonetheless, the supreme court has decided that double jeopardy does not bar retrial of the accused because the courts mistake was not geared towards guilt or innocence. Lackhart versus Nelson is one good landmark decision.…

    • 854 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    They took this view because , in their estimation it was not in the public interest for persons to cause actual bodily or to wound others for no reason. The decision of whether an individual can consent to harm presents a moral dilemma in the judiciary, leading to many arbitrary deceptions which are in clear need of resolution, also not further made easy by the decision in R v Brown. Also, following the decision of Lords, a lot of unresolved issues were at stake. : Where and when should a line be drawn between violence which one can consent to, and violence that one cannot consent to? What business does the law have with acts taking place, with the active consent of all the participants, in private, in the absence of express legislation, making such acts…

    • 783 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    There must be a genuine likelihood of imminent violence by a hostile audience. If the law proscribing the conduct is vague or overbroad then it is invalid. The law is unconstitutional if made viewpoint discrimination. Here, the Abusive Words Statute punishes any abusive word or term. The statute is overbroad because it doesn’t distinguishes between fighting words and offending words.…

    • 503 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    So what purpose does bans serve besides harassing us law abiding peaceful men? There is no freedom from facing the consequences of committing crime and fraud. Criminals should be tried in a court of law and do justice for the victims of crime. The governmental action should ideally be to provide justice and protection for us. The government itself is not above the laws of morality and ethics.…

    • 1490 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    However, it is ethically wrong because the evidence was obtained illegally. The officer and some within society may feel inclined to believe the end result justified the means, but obtaining illegal evidence is an inappropriate action under the law. Therefore, the utilitarianism ideology has weakness when dealing with injustice and implies that it is okay to mistreat one to benefit others (Braswell, McCarthy and McCarthy, 2014). As a result, the officer’s actions are dependent on the choice that was made coupled by the situation in which the decision was made (Gaines & Kappeler,…

    • 792 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    Police Charter Violations

    • 1024 Words
    • 4 Pages

    However, the excessive use of police powers can be called into question when a charter rights is violation (Allen, 2009). One such right can be found in section 8 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, the right to be protected against unreasonable search and seizure (Greenspan, Rosenberg & Henein, 2014). This is a serious Charter violation as it is intrusive and send the message that the state is allowed to seize evidence under any means necessary. This was evident in the R. v. Collins (1987) case where police officers without sufficient grounds apply a throat hold against the accused in a bar based on mere suspicions that were not corroborated with the surveillance of the accused R v Collins [1987] 1 S.C.R. 265.…

    • 1024 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Decent Essays

Related Topics