Brazil’s criminal justice system and comparisons to the United States

Brazil’s Criminal Justice System and Comparison to the United States
Names:
Institution:
Date:
Introduction
The functionality and the structure of criminal justice systems of various countries differ significantly depending on the core values the justice system is based on. Brazil has a system that does not accept financial punishment in its criminal justice system is making its correctional facilities to be overcrowded hence attracting the attentions of the human rights bodies in the world. The Brazilian justice system is based on the 1988 Constitution. However, the amendment of the constitution in 2004 reformed the justice system. The law enforcement agencies in the country mainly compose of the federal state police working in all states in the country and the state civil police who restore order and ensure security in the states. Transformation in the justice system of this country has been too slow as compared to the United States, and this is attributed to political interference in the justice department and the increases corruption levels in the country. Furthermore, the delays in passing of judgment to offenders have increased the number of pre-trial inmates hence congesting the prisons in the country. The legal system of the country uses civil laws. The justice system has judges who also acts as the prosecutors and questions the accused. Such a system is said to be inquisitorial and it is adopted by Brazil’s judicial system.
Brazil’s Historical Development in Politics
The political system of Brazil transited from being a military dictatorship to a politically democratic country.

Since the coup of 1964, the political system of the country has seen tremendous changes which led to the demolishing of the monarchy system by the army who became more politically affiliated to particular political joints. The current political structure of the country has decentralized functions and governors are the heads of states and the federal government held by the president deliberates on issues of the entire country. Each state has its constitution which is autonomous to the law promulgated in 1988 and rigid within the framework of the federal constitution.
Brazil’s Criminal Inquisitorial Justice System
Brazil uses an inquisitorial model in its criminal justice system. In this approach, the judges act as the prosecutors and interrogate the defendants. This model allows the judges to directly questions the accused with an intention of determining if the information provided is consistent with the crime being committed. Initially, the country was using a diffused model in which the decisions made only relied on the constitution articles pertaining the case being heard in the courts (Dammer & Albanese, 2014, p. 156). However due to an increased number of criminal offenses that do not have a direct interpretation of the sentence in the constitution of the country the judges in the courts were allowed to pass judgment to the offenders independent of the constitution. The country opted for this model so that it can have a consistent and well informed punitive measure to the offenders regarding his/her model. The criminal law and court system of the country, however, follows an adversary system. For this reason, all the evidence that is deemed unconstitutional is dismissed in the courts. The judgment made by the judges is final, and it is not appealable.
Comparison of Brazil and United States Criminal Justice Systems
The Brazilian and the US legal systems differ significantly. Brazil uses civil laws which are based on European civil codes especially Portugal (Syam, 2014, Para.1). The United States, on the other hand, uses common law which is based on English traditions. The differences witnessed on the two systems extend to their court systems. In Brazil the judges are major players in litigation, examining witnesses and investigating the facts of a case under hearing. This is unlike in the United States where most of this roles are performed by the attorneys of the respective parties involved in the case. The variation of the judgments in two countries depends on the constitutions and the federal punitive laws of the individual countries. In the United States, for instance, the justice system allows financial punishment to the offenders while in Brazil there is no financial penalty except for specific cases. This has made the correctional facilities in this country to be fully packed beyond their capacities. Furthermore, the punitive measure imposed on offenders in Brazil varies significantly from those in the United States. Brazil only allows a maximum of 30 years while in the United States an offender found guilty can be incarcerated for life depending on the magnitude of the offense (Phelps, 2011, p. 43).
Concerning the court system of the two countries, there exists a slight difference although the general layout seems the same. Brazil has state and federal courts while US has an additional category of municipal (local) courts that handle small matters like vehicular traffic offenses. In Brazil the courts are distinguished by instances. For a case to be heard by the second instance court, it has to have passed through the first instance court, or it is directly referred to the second instance court. The case can follow the hierarchy till it reaches the Supreme Court. However, there are instances when certain cases can only be heard by the supreme courts which are responsible for defending the constitution of the country (Berland, 2011, p. 699). In the United States, the court system has three categories; state, federal and municipal courts. In every state, the justice system is analogous to the federal government’s system having their independent courts. However, the Supreme Court serves all the states and is used to solve cases involving states (US Courts, 2016, Para. 3).
Strengths and Weaknesses of the Brazilian Criminal Justice System
The law enforcement units are composed of state and federal police. They are further expanded to form five distinct divisions. This has made it easier for the criminal justice system of the country to maintain law and order in all sectors with ease. The court structure of the country having been distinguished by instances, the flow of cases follows the right order. This is essential in ensuring the right judgment is passed and accused given a chance to appeal. According to Perlingeiro (2014, p. 36), the court system of the country allows the states to deal with different cases that are under their jurisdiction. However, those involving the federal government are tackled by the federal courts. The state justice system embraces rehabilitation of the juveniles and gives them a chance to reenter the community again. In this regard, the juveniles whose judgment can be passed are placed under rehabilitation facilities other than the prisons. Those below the age of 12 are not prosecuted but allowed back to the society (Perlingeiro, 2014, p. 46). Lastly, the criminal procedure in both the federal and state courts gives both the defendants and the complainants to present their evidence before the trial can begin. This transparency has reduced the number of inappropriate imprisonment of some individuals due to lack of opportunity to present their evidence. Even after the defendant confesses, the judges’ still follows all the procedures to that end.
Despite the strengths, the Brazils justice system has, it has several weaknesses that limit its implementation of the country’s constitution. First, political interference in the judicial arm of the federal government prevents the courts from effectively exercising their duties. These are so because most of the judges in the judiciary are appointed by the President and approved by the Senate. According to Nelken (2009, p. 3), political interference in the judicial system impairs the judgment passed on politicians found to commit certain crimes or even corruption. The power of convincing the judges to act contrary is high. Second, lack of financial punishment in the country’s sentencing has crowded the prisons. These have made the Brazilian prisons to be among the most crowded and violation of human rights is rampant. The law enforcement units have been criticized for using excessive force, especially in prisons. This has attracted the attention of human rights organizations. Lastly, the criminal pre-trial period is not defined in the system, and this has piled pressure on the system due to the increased number of cases that have not been heard. Although each state has its courts and at least one appeal court the process is still slow due to the procedures involved. Furthermore, the jurisdiction of allowing judges to pass unconstitutional judgment has led to the imprisonment of some offenders illegally (Perlingeiro, 2014, p. 40).
Despite the effectiveness of the law enforcement units in maintaining law and order, crimes in the country have not reduced. Crimes in the country are mainly instigated by the presence of drug gangs and unemployment among some youths. The judicial system of Brazil can be used to inform improvement in any country that has a troubled or an inefficient criminal justice system. Their court procedures are well defined, and the proper channels are followed before prosecution is made. Furthermore, the centralization of the law enforcement authorities can be used by any country to bring change to their country’s enforcement units. It gives a chance for the evidence to be efficiently and consistently collected before trials are done.
Conclusion
The criminal justice system of Brazil can be effective if few changes are made in the judiciary like allowing financial penalties for some cases so as to reduce the population in prisons. The perception of the community to the prisons in this country is negative, and nobody would wish to be placed behind bars in the Brazil. By comparing the criminal justice system of the United States to the Brazilian, the differences reveal that the rehabilitative approaches of the two countries are different. However, there seem to be justice in punitive measures on juveniles since they are not placed in prisons, but some are even allowed to reenter the community after the rehabilitation program. A proper and transparent justice system free from political interference is always considered valid in the implementation of a country’s constitution.
References
Berland, D. (2011). Stopping the Pendulum: Why Stare Decisis Should Constrain the Court from Further Modification of the Search Incident to Arrest Exception. Illinois: University of Illinois. https://illinoislawreview.org/wp-content/ilr-content/articles/2011/2/Berland.pdf
Dammer, H. R., & Albanese, J. S. (2014). Comparative criminal justice systems. Belmont, CA: Cengage Learning. https://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=H6qs5a_6EE8C&oi=fnd&pg=PR7&dq=Dammer,+H.+R.,+%26+Albanese,+J.+S.+(2014).+Comparative+criminal+justice+systems&ots=_xFnhctcNO&sig=7GhroWP8pstVOHeyR06sLrns7bM
Nelken, D. (2009). Comparative Criminal Justice: Beyond Ethnocentricism and Relativism. European Journal of Criminology, 6(4), 291-311. http://orca.cf.ac.uk/40554/1/NelkenComparative%20Criminal%20Justice2009.pdf
Perlingeiro, R. (2014). Brazil’s Administrative Justice System in a Comparative Context. Revista de Investigações Constitucionais, 1(3), 33-58. http://ojs.c3sl.ufpr.br/ojs/index.php/rinc/issue/download/1904/303#page=37
Phelps, M. S. (2011). Rehabilitation in the Punitive Era: The Gap between Rhetoric and Reality in U.S. Prison Programs. Law Soc Rev, 33-68. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3762476/
Syam, P. (2014, February 28). Major Differences Between the Brazilian and U.S. Legal Systems. Retrieved from WashULaw: https://onlinelaw.wustl.edu/blog/major-differences-brazilian-u-s-legal-systems/
US Courts. (2016). Court Role and Structure. Retrieved from United States Courts: http://www.uscourts.gov/about-federal-courts/court-role-and-structure