The United States has adopted a community-oriented policing model that is structured around three fundamental premises associated with policing. Firstly, the policing model is defined by the underlying premise. In this premise, what police departments are expected to do is defined by their organizational structures that determine their roles and responsibilities. Secondly, the model is defined by the contextual premise. The contextual premise seeks to create an outlook that describes police as being an "open system" that is highly influenced by their immediate environments (Maguire & Mastrofski, 2000). Lastly, the model is defined by the universality premise. The premise builds on the role of the police as being the same as those that can be found in any other country around the world. The administrative structure that the United States has adopted is considered as being decentralized, whereby each of the states has its own separate and complete judicial structure that is comprised of state courts. State courts are regarded as courts operating under "general jurisdiction," meaning that they can engage in the hearing of cases that are not specific to federal courts. However, it is essential to note that there exist federal courts, which tend to operate under limited jurisdiction; thus, meaning that they can only hear cases that are authorized by the United States Constitution or federal statutes anchored in law. The corrections system in the United States has a crucial mandate towards incarceration for periods defined by the courts of law while ensuring that inmates go through corrections to help reduce the risk of recidivism after their release. The legal traditions within the United States were primarily derived from the common law, which is synonymous with an English law that traces its history from Britain. Historically, the United States embraced the use of English law as a basis through which to define its legal traditions. However, this changed significantly through the enactment of a constitution in the country that sought to outlaw specific aspects of the English law. Examples of areas that were banned to help build American legal traditions including prohibiting bills of attainder, as well as, general search warrants. The culture, adopted in the United States, has had a significant influence on its legal system taking into account that the country uses religion as a critical factor to help in determining legislation that would help in expansion, overruling, and modification of the common law.
Germany
Policing Model
Germany has adopted what can be described as an intelligence-led policing model that works towards understanding risks while setting up adequate measures to help in the management of the risks. Similar to the United States, Germany operates its law enforcement at the state level meaning that each state is accorded the authority to adopt necessary structures to help in dealing with crime. What can be noted from the policing models adopted in each of the rules is that they rely wholly on information that is shared by members of the public through different websites. The police use such information as part of their standard approach towards identifying and dealing with underlying risks that are likely to affect the safety and security of the community.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Judicial Structure and the Corrections System
The legal system in Germany is structured around three distinct types of courts. The first type of court is the ordinary court, which has a crucial mandate towards dealing with a majority of both criminal and civil cases. The second type of court is the specialized court, which includes courts ranging from administrative, labor, and social, among others (Brouard & Hönnige, 2017). Lastly, Germany has a constitutional court that is solely mandated with conducting judicial reviews, as well as interpreting the constitution. Regarding the corrections system in Germany, what must be noted is that the prisons are run solely by the federal government. Germany places twofold emphasis on the corrections system, which reflects on ensuring that prisons lead a life that is free of any form of crime while ensuring that the society is protected from corruption.
Legal Traditions
Germany embraces a rather traditional civil law system that is defined by three primary sources, which are laws passed by the European Union, the constitution, and laws passed by the federal parliament. Germany, as opposed to other countries in the EU, finds itself with a rather strict legal tradition that it has embraced for a long time that reflects on its structured approach to legal conformities today. The legal traditions in Germany have been defined by the 1949 Basic Law for the Federal Republic of Germany, which has been of key-value towards setting up the modern judiciary, as well as, guiding the formation of the country's constitution. Regarding the impacts of its culture, Germany uses its perception as a source of definition towards highlighting how it seeks to ensure that the law is adjudicated in a manner that reflects on the cultural expectations of the German people.
Saudi Arabia
Policing Model
The policing model that can be associated with Saudi Arabia is centralized, coordinated with a single line of command with the head being the King. The King has the authority to appoint both the Minister of Interior and Director of Public Safety, who are usually senior members of the King's family line. Over the years, the adoption of this model in Saudi Arabia has been considered as being rather non-effective, considering that the police have been accused of being used for personal expectations. Additionally, the model has been castigated attributed to the fact that it does not regulate or restrict the use of force within the police force; thus, being considered as non-effective for the local population.
Judicial Structure and the Corrections System
The administrative structure adopted in Saudi Arabia is well in-line with the expectations of Islamic law (Shari'ah), taking into account that Saudi Arabia is an Islamic state. At the very top of the administrative structure is the King, who is considered as being the final court of appeal but also wields power to offer pardons. The court system in the country consists of three main parts, which are Shari’ah Courts, Board of Grievances, and various committees within government ministries (Baamir, 2016). Each of the components is expected to follow the set-out Shari'ah law as a critical determinant of their proper positioning. The corrections system in Saudi Arabia is considered to be one of the toughest in the world today attributed to the fact that once one is imprisoned, the government has the legal authority to put his or her family's wealth on welfare.
Legal Traditions
When evaluating the legal traditions in Saudi Arabia, what is clear is that the country's approach to law is solely defined by Islamic teachings. Historically, the country has been reprimanded for its use of religion as a legal tradition, which has had severe implications for non-Saudis. However, the country finds itself being governed by the religious teachings that are defined within the Qur'an, which highlights specific teachings that all Muslims are expected to abide by. The country’s culture has been seen as being rather self-centered, taking into account that a majority of the legal decisions made in the nation often seek to discriminate against some of the parties. An example can be seen in laws that seek to restrict women from driving, which have been considered as being somewhat restrictive on the part of the women.
References
Baamir, A. Y. (2016). Shari’a Law in Commercial and Banking Arbitration: Law and Practice in Saudi Arabia . Routledge.
Brouard, S., & Hönnige, C. (2017). Constitutional courts as veto players: Lessons from the United States, France, and Germany. European Journal of Political Research , 56 (3), 529-552.
Maguire, E. R., & Mastrofski, S. D. (2000). Patterns of community policing in the United States. Police Quarterly , 3 (1), 4-45.
