Suchergebnisse

The purpose of traffic law enforcement—as with law enforcement generally—is to offset selfish motivation and condition community habits through conditioning the habits of individuals. In order to meet the problems of traffic congestion and traffic accidents, effective enforcement is necessary. Es sential here is an adequately manned, well-trained, and properly administered police force. Some of the more fundamental problems of the police service involve organization, administra tion, training, and recruitment. Reforms here will provide the nation with a professional police service of the first order—a service which will take the problems of law enforcement, includ ing traffic law, in its stride. But since citations and arrests are unproductive unless followed by appropriate court action, well- trained judges and prosecutors in permanent traffic courts are also essential. Certain important changes are needed in laws, court organization, and procedure. And a co-ordinated effort by engineers, police, driver-licensing personnel, educators, and city planners is necessary, not only to have effective traffic law enforcement for reducing accidents, improving street efficiency, and contributing to the general social and economic welfare, but also to develop a system which will play a vital part in winning and maintaining the individual citizen's respect for the law.

The purpose of traffic law enforcement-as with law enforcement generally-is to offset selfish motivation & condition community habits through conditioning the habits of individuals. In order to meet the problems of traffic congestion & traffic 'accidents, effective enforcement is necessary. Essential here is an adequately manned, well-trained, & properly administered police force. Some of the more fundamental problems of the police service involve org, admire, training, & recruitment. Reforms here will provide the nation with a professional police service of the first order-a service which will take the problems of law enforcement, including traffic law, in its stride. But since citations & arrests are unproductive unless followed by appropriate court action, well-trained judges & prosecutors in permanent traffic courts are also essential. Certain important changes are needed in laws, court org, & procedure. And a co-ordinated effort by engineers, police, driver-licensing personnel, educators, & city planners is necessary, not only to have effective traffic law enforcement for reducing accidents, improving street efficiency, & contributing to the general soc & econ welfare, but also to develop a system which will play a vital part in winning & maintaining the individual citizen's respect for the law. AA.

Investigations of how criminal justice actors contribute to variation in sentencing typically focus on the role played by the judge. We argue that sentencing should be viewed as a collaborative process involving actors other than the judge and that the role of the prosecutor is particularly salient. We also contend that the courtroom workgroup literature has suggested that sentences may vary depending on the particular judge and prosecutor to whom the case is assigned. By using a unique data set from three U.S. district courts (N = 2,686) that identifies both the judge and the prosecutor handling the case, we examine how the judge, the prosecutor, and the judge–prosecutor dyad contribute to variance in offender sentences. We do this by employing cross‐classified random‐effects models to estimate the variance components associated with judges, prosecutors, and judge–prosecutor interactions. The results indicate that disparity attributable to the prosecutor is larger than disparity from the judge. Moreover, the role that the judge plays is moderated by the prosecutor to whom the case is assigned, as the judge–prosecutor effect is consistently larger than other random effects across the models. We also find that results vary by judicial district.

Some aspects of the convergence of guarantees of independence of prosecutors and judges in Ukraine, due to constitutional changes in the judiciary, are highlighted in the paper. The purpose of the article is to sort out the prerequisites and identify trends in the convergence of guarantees of independence of prosecutors to judges at the current stage of reforming the justice system. It is established that the current scientific discourse on the issue of institutional determination of the place of the Prosecutor's Office in the mechanism of state power is mainly to determine the benefits of the autonomous status of the Prosecutor's Office, in which it doesn't belong to any branch of government, and holds the status of an autonomous body within the judiciary. It is argued that the institutional recognition of the Prosecutor's Office as an autonomous and independent body of the judiciary is more promising for the purpose of bringing the legal status of the prosecutor closer to the legal status of the judge, considering the interdependence of their powers and the need to ensure proper justice. It is stated that international standards define the independence of the Prosecutor's Office as an unconditional consequence of the independence from the judiciary and declare the prosecutors to have guarantees similar to those of judges, given by the proximity of the missions of judges and prosecutors, particularly, regarding the appointment, transfer, promotion and the application of disciplinary sanctions. As a result, it is proposed that the formation of bodies that determine the level of professional training of persons who intend to take the position of a prosecutor or judge, as well as resolve issues of disciplinary liability of prosecutors and judges together with their transfer and dismissal to be as close as possible. The peculiarities of legislative regulation of the formation of judicial and prosecutor's governance at the current stage of reforming the justice system in Ukraine are analyzed. It was found that the tendencies towards convergence of these processes in relation to prosecutors to the level of judges are weakening. It is proposed to create a single judicial and prosecutor's governance to address career and discipline issues, which will harmonize and simplify the structure of judicial governance in Ukraine, as well as unify these procedures for prosecutors and judges as key public officials of the justice system.

AbstractWhere does the legal profession's identity originate from? How do we explain the intra-professional variations, as multiple legal professions diverge in their political orientations? This paper argues that the legal profession critically develops their core identity resisting incumbent rulewhenthe state undergoes fundamental power reconfiguration. It is their political position as opposed to power in a critical juncture of state transformation that determines the legal profession's collective ideal of who they are and what actions they take. Drawing on 133 interviews with Taiwanese judges, lawyers, and prosecutors, extensive fieldwork, and archival data up to the 1990s, this paper demonstrates how democratization shapes professional identity. As respective professions experienced different levels and models of authoritarian containment, they took separate trajectories to challenge the Kuomintang's party-state and pledge to different normative commitments. Taiwanese judges categorically defend judicial independence, lawyers advocate for people's rights, and prosecutors marshal under justice to check abuse of power.