The constitutions that exist in different countries are responsible for ensuring that the laws are followed. The law of the land ensures that the policies put in place are followed and the lives, properties, and liberties of citizens in a particular country are protected. There are two main categories of law, that is, civil and criminal law. Unlike the civil law, the criminal law outlines the charges faced by one who indulges in outlawed acts such as theft, sexual abuse and murder among others. On the other hand, civil law highlights the creation of solutions to the various conflicts that exist within the society. Such conflicts may involve family disputes such as issues relating to sale or rent matters among others. Both types of law are perceived differently by the society at large. Civil law is significant in protecting the public criminal acts. Criminal law, on the other hand, is viewed as a powerful aspect that is used to shield the public from activities that are carried out against the community.
Civil law majors in disputes that often occur between two entities. It entails official documents that provide guidelines on how these disputes are solved, for example, Health and Safety Code, the Business and Professions Code and other rules and regulations that are provided by the government. Both private and public parties can initiate a cause of action when dealing with these cases. On the other hand, criminal law involves the personal offences of the individual against the state or the federal government. This law involves circumstances where a person breaks a criminal law that was created by the government (Surbhi, 2017).
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
The type of penalty that is issued in criminal law is different from the type of punishment that is issued in civil law. Those who are found guilty in criminal cases have a higher chance of facing some kind of probation or even incarceration. In civil cases, however, those who are found guilty may end up going to jail or experiencing a financial penalty. In some civil cases, the judge may order the guilty party to change their behavior. Many civil cases are solved outside the courtroom as opposed to the criminal cases which must be settled in courts. The civil cases mostly involve a considerable amount of money that is offered to the accuser so that they may drop the suit. The criminal hearing process are considered to be more serious as compared to civil litigation since it is recognized that the threat of punishment does not discourage or prevent the crime from occurring again as compared to incarceration where the criminal loses their freedom. Therefore, due to the high values that have been placed on methods of punishment in criminal law, the defendants in criminal cases have more rights and protections as compared to the defendants in civil cases (Abramson, 2017).
In criminal cases, the burden of proof tends to be dependent on a particular state. Thus the existing state must be able to have evidence and prove that the accused is guilty even though the defendant is presumed to be not guilty until proven otherwise. Thus, the defendant is not required anything unless in exception incidences whereby the defendant would want to prove that they were insane or defending oneself of not being innocent. In such cases, the accused will have to prove to the court that they are not guilty. In addition, the state must prove that the defendant fulfilled each part of the statutory crime and that the participation of the accused is beyond any reasonable doubt. There are two elements of a crime in criminal cases which the state has to prove that the defendant is guilty of the crime without reasonable doubt. These elements are actus reus and mens rea. Actus reus involves the components of the crime that are physical such as the act itself of committing the crime. On the other hand, mens rea is the criminal intent which means that the offender intended to commit the crime. The state might be compelled to prove that there was both mens rea and actus reus. This compulsion is called occurrence and is whereby there is presence of both the intent of committing the crime and the act of committing the crime. Legal experts claim that the state must prove that the accused is approximately 98% guilty of the crime. However, in civil cases, the burden of proof may lie with the accuser or defendant, depending on the situation of the case. For instance, if the complainant launches a prima facie case, the burden of proof will transfer to the defendant. In civil cases, the majority of the evidence favors the accuser. For instance, if the jury is swayed by the evidence to believe that the defendant caused 50% of the crime then the accuser wins the case. This standard is lower than that of Criminal law. There are, however, cases that require the accuser to prove that the level of their case is “clear and convincing”. This level has standards that are higher than that of the majority of evidence but it is lower than that of “beyond reasonable doubt,” (Abramson, 2017).
David Freidman lost an argument with professor Isaiah Berlin which led him to change his perception to realism and intuition in the context of status and nature of normative claims. He commits to intuitionism which is unusual as it has no significant role in his genera argument for a society that is free and stateless. He convincingly argues that it is possible for rational people to achieve a society that is peaceful, orderly and stateless. In addition, he argues that honesty provides opportunities that are more beneficial and he even gives a positive, instead of a normative account of the rights. However, he fails to acknowledge that natural selection in evolution does not produce human beings that have the factual entities of perception. Furthermore, people’s perceptions of moral convictions and beliefs originate from the emotional reactions and thus cannot be caused by any mora perceptions. The moral facts do not fulfil any explanatory purpose. His moral intentions seem like an afterthought that are dispensable.
References
Abramson, A. (2017). Civil Law vs. Criminal Law: Breaking Down the Differences. Retrieved from http://www.rasmussen.edu/degrees/justice-studies/blog/civil-law-versus-criminal-law/
Surbhi, S. (2017). Difference between Civil Law and Criminal Law (with Comparison Chart) - Key Differences. Retrieved from https://keydifferences.com/difference-between-civil-law-and-criminal-law.html
