Justice and Ethical Dilemmas

Justice and Ethical Dilemmas

Unethical practices in courts have become rampant in the 21^st century. Judges and other court official engage in unethical practices for personal gains instead of serving the public with due diligence and justice. The primary reason why unscrupulous activities often take place within court boundaries is that key judiciary officials such as the judges and defense attorneys have discretionary powers. Therefore, some of the officials might want to take advantage of their privileges in order to engage in inappropriate activities for financial gain. Justice and Ethical Dilemmas

Unethical Activities

Borrowing Money from Court Employees

Borrowing cash from employees amounts to unethical conduct because the employees who give out their money do so in fear of losing their job. The judges and other senior officials of the court should be able to secure better sources of money other than borrowing it from subordinates or colleagues. It is not clear from the federal regulations whether there are legal grounds to protect the employees from such a situation, but generally, the employees have the right to work independently from their seniors and so they should not even engage in agreements surrounding money issues.

Conducting Personal Business from The Court Chambers

It is unethical for the magistrates to conduct personal businesses from the court chambers because they are meant to serve the public but not for use for personal gains.  All officials who work in the court to facilitate the judicial processes are public servants and should not use their offices for personal gain. Conducting their own business in the court chambers means that they are using the public facilities and resources to enrich themselves, which is unethical. Members of the judiciary are required to use public resources to serve people and not to conduct their personal businesses (Berk-Seligson, 2017).  Justice and Ethical Dilemmas

Shutting Court Down Early to Prevent the Defendant from Filing Pleadings in an Ongoing Case Justice and Ethical Dilemmas

The federal regulations provide that the court should never show partiality or make the judgment that favours one party and denies justice to the other. That is obvious because the mandate of the court is to provide justice to all. In case the court shuts down earlier to avoid the defendant from filing pleadings in an ongoing case, that might appear as unjust because ultimately, the defendant will not present sufficient evidence before the court. The ruling of such case might, therefore, be partial and might deny the defendant an opportunity to have a fair hearing if the evidence that would stimulate the case is blocked.

Taking Kickbacks from Private Juvenile Detention Facilities for Locking More Juveniles On Questionable Charges

It is not long ago when one of the U.S. judges, Mark Ciavarella, was jailed for being involved in the illegal detention of juveniles in order to receive kickbacks. Illegal detention of juveniles is unlawful and unethical and contributes to the violation of professional codes of conduct. An attorney involved in such a conduct should be removed from office and be convicted for taking part in illegal practices. Taking kickbacks to facilitate wrong acts is corruption and a crime. According to the United States Federal regulations, the magistrate should be convicted for committing a felony (Berk-Seligson, 2017). Justice and Ethical Dilemmas

Jailing an Entire Courtroom Because a Cellphone Went Off During a Proceeding, And No One Came Forward to Accept Responsibility.

When an attorney jails the entire courtroom because a cell phone rings during proceedings amount to misuse of power. Despite the fact the judges ought to maintain order within the courtroom, it not fair or even reasonable to jail the entire courtroom for a minor human error. There is absolutely no relation between the attendants who came to listen to the proceedings of the court and an individual who violated the rules of the court. The audience cannot be punished for the mistake of one person and so the person who violated the rule should be punished alone.

Suggesting to persons appearing before him to contribute to certain charities in lieu of paying fines

. Even though any individual has the right to donate, it is not god when such a donation is made out of compulsion by a person in a more powerful position.

Using court employees to perform translating services for his mother’s daycare business.

When a magistrate uses an employee to perform translating services for his mother’s daycare business, it is unethical and often seen as a misuse of power. This is because such an official is only taking the advantage of his position to do something that could not be possible if he were not an official of the court. Thus he is acting unethically.

Ethical and Acceptable Activities

Publicly endorsing and campaigning for a candidate for judicial office

Endorsing and campaigning for a candidate might not be treated as unethical, especially if such activities are done in good faith. The magistrates with other top officials can endorse and campaign for a person they believe is competent to fill the position being contested for. If only those officials use the correct procedures and avoid corrupt means to put an individual in power, campaigning for a person cannot be treated as unethical behaviours.

Directing other business court employees to perform personal errands for him during court hours

When the magistrate directs other business court employee to perform personal errands for him during court hours is ethical because no public time or resources are misused. Sometimes a magistrate might be committed to many engagements and it may be difficult for him to manage all court proceedings (Vaughn, 2015). Thus, he can find another trusted employee to perform his errands in order to commit himself to more demanding issues.

Banning one of the defense attorneys in a case from speaking during the trial.

The magistrate may restrain specific attorneys from representing an individual because of specific reason found reasonable by the magistrate. Such an occasion might not obviously lead to unethical conduct. As long as the judge owes the mandate to control and maintain order in the courtroom, banning one of the defense attorneys is still ethical. The attorney might be banned for various reasons such as misconduct, use of alcohol, use of force, coercion or scathing words etc.

Conclusion

Most of the unethical issues performed by the court officials can be punished and such officials can even lose their jobs. The federal policy highlights various key ethical requirements that all professional bodies should adhere to and not just the court (Vaughn, 2015). Therefore, when court official uses more powers than what has been bestowed to them or when they use their powers for the wrong reasons, they should be punished and or even suspended so that they can be replaced by new personnel who are faithful with the powers entrusted to them.

Justice and Ethical Dilemmas