The availability and existence of an effective and efficient judicial system of executing criminal cases is a global concern to all parties involved. Different countries and states are required to formulate and adopt certain policies that will help achieve this. However, the approaches to be put forward should have a clear understanding of the crime in all dimensions. Thereafter, they should come up with relevant strategies to policy making within their law systems to help implement certain areas that affect the citizens. Some of these approaches include; the Iron Triangle, Issue Networks and the Top-Down policy making perspectives.
To begin with, the Iron Triangle approach involves developing close relationships as time progresses between the congressional council, the federal bureaucracy and the interest alliances. The able relationship afterwards creates an enabling environment to develop the policies necessary in the criminal justice processes (Neubauer and Fradella, 2018). On the hand, the Issue Networks phenomenon refers to a committee of different interest groups who have come together with an aim of executing a certain agenda. In such a way they are able to have a positive impact on the policies to be formulated by the relevant agencies in the judicial system. The issues addressed here can be of either local or international nature which is largely influenced by goals set to be achieved by the alliance. Lastly, the Top-Down approach is a form of policy making procedure where the main complex issue or problem is broken down into multiple smaller parts in the judicial system. The process of decomposing continues until the required aspect by the criminal class is well clarified and understood.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
The state of choice and preference of which approach to be used by diverse judicial system clearly outlines the differences that exists between these three perspectives (Cairney, 2012). The Iron Triangle proposition has three main components namely; the congressional councils, interest alliances and the federal bureaucracy. It follows that these organs correlate with each other to enhance the process of policy making. Each has a set of responsibilities it should accomplish to ensure it’s in harmony with other aspects. In contrary, the Issue Networks takes into account all the groups and their concern together to come up with a specific plan. The Issue Networks unlike the Iron Triangle approach can be formed by any free and willing group of the people in the state; not a must to be a congressional committee. The main agenda is to achieve the objectives. Meanwhile the Top-Down procedure exhibits a lot of differences compared to the two above. First, it’s always applied in the test case creation while the other perspectives are priory used in the diagnosing of the issues. Apart from that, it does not require much communication unlike the two from relevant groups. Finally, the Top-Down policy making procedure reduces the larger task into smaller ones while the other approaches look at the issues at a broader perspective. I would recommend the judicial bodies to adopt the Top-Down phenomenon due to its comparative advantages (Newig and Koontz, 2014). This methodology is productive such that each proportion of an entire policy is looked into. Therefore, there is the probability of aligning the project goals with the organizations’ strategic goals. The process of decision making in the handling the different classes of criminal justices id eventually attained.
In conclusion, the formulation and application of the effective policies in the judicial systems guarantees fair and credible criminal justice procedures. However, this is only possible if the nature, classes and the other aspects of crime are put into considerations. It’s prudent that each institution either that of business or administrative nature adopt and apply these specific policies in their systems. This is because the judicial bodies in existence have a responsibility of ensuring the well-being of mankind in terms of all the fundamental rights are adhered to.
References
Cairney, P. (2012). Complexity theory in political science and public policy. Political Studies Review , 10 (3), 346-358.
Neubauer, D. W., & Fradella, H. F. (2018). America's courts and the criminal justice system . Cengage Learning.
Newig, J., & Koontz, T. M. (2014). Multi-level governance, policy implementation and participation: the EU's mandated participatory planning approach to implementing environmental policy. Journal of European Public Policy , 21 (2), 248-267.
