Reasoning of Tokyo and Nuremburg Tribunal Essay

Introduction

The Nuremberg and Tokyo tribunals were the earliest international criminal tribunals following the emergence of the Second World War. The allied powers, United States, the France United Kingdom established the Nuremberg tribunal in Germany to deal with prosecution and punishment of the criminals of war from the European Axis. This tribunal dealt with the trial of political and military leaders. The Tokyo tribunal was created to make trials over Japanese political and military leaders. The two tribunals were different in terms of their location and structure. However, the Tokyo and Nuremberg tribunals were purposed for the trial and punishment of those who staged wars. They were to punish those criminals who disrupted peace by planning and financing any form of aggressive war and violation of treaties made.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Save 25%

War crimes, for example, the violation of war customs and murder of persons were against the law and those responsible were to be charged. Charges of crimes against humanity were applicable, for example, murder, deportation, slavery and any related inhuman act on people. The charters that governed the international military tribunals at the Tokyo and Nuremburg tribunals were exposed to challenges of legitimacy since there were no clear specifications of charges for crimes against humanity and peace. Therefore these two tribunals provided various reasoning to defendants when questions related to charges were asked to the tribunals especially where the charters did not give detailed information. This reasoning were made out of comparison to other past proceedings and treaties made and how they may relate to the tribunal charters.

In consideration of charges of crimes against peace, the Nuremburg tribunal put it that the consideration of the extent of aggressive war not very important prior to removal of the London Agreement. The tribunal also reasoned that entirely the international law did not legalize charged acts of aggression. Based on the illegality of criminality, Nuremburg tribunal put it that the agreement gives a declarative to that kind of law was illegal according to the international law. Therefore, individuals responsible for planning and financing that type of war are involving themselves in crime. This reasoning thus prohibited any form of aggressive war-making it an international law. The Tokyo tribunal implemented reasoning's almost similar to those of the Nuremberg proceedings. According to justice, Roling aggressive war had not been considered as a crime before the Nuremburg and the Tokyo charters were put in place.

Taxonomy of International Criminal Law

International Criminal Laws copy very little from the National Conference of State Legislatures. International Crime Laws are drafted by technical diplomats by even basing on treaties hence affect all nations across the world. The reasoning applied in NCSL is that guidelines in NCSL apply in ICL with a different force compared to how it applies in the domestic penal order. International tribunals apply some NCSL principles during proceedings. The legislature identifies crime and suggests the appropriate punishment in domestic law contrary in ICL states and legal organizations propose treaties which guide major international prohibitions these treaties are costly to alter hence many nations fear the expenses of changing the treaties

The International tribunals lack an international legislature which would rather make and change International Criminal laws. The previous laws put in place are challenging to interpret and requires the total attention of judges. Modern criminal tribunals make interpretation of agreements and laws that were put in plus without what is expected from modern penal codes. International tribunals do not have many expectations of how precise are the definitions of international crimes.

According to Van Shack, International tribunals should enact defendant rights by referring to the existing local guidelines of sentencing criminals and the defendant rights. This is because defendant rights according to International criminal laws have not been properly identified and have given the jury a difficult experience when trying to interpret and apply them. Defendants have experienced what they may call injustice due to the absence of well-defined defendant rights. International tribunals administer justice based on relating cases to each other.

Domestic sentencing, for example, the local sentencing of criminals with a nation have been clearly defined in the law and altered by the legislature where possible hence have been used to effectively conduct legal procedures. Since every International Criminal Law aligns itself with laws made from diplomatic decisions and treaties then it may be viable if the diplomats who draft the International Criminal Law make defendant rights similar to those applicable in their own nations based on the fact that the is no international legislature which makes international criminal law.

How Prisoner Rights Relate to the Amount of Litigation in the United States

The corrections in the criminal justice system are meant to rehabilitate and give appropriate guidance to inmates as well as to confine criminals from joining the public. Criminals are convicted persons who have broken the law by violating other people's rights in committing various crimes. Therefore, imprisonment is one of the legal processes of giving justice to those whom injustice had been done to them. As a result, those inmates in prison have to be punished but under the guidance of Prisoner's rights. Despite the fact that prisoners and convicted criminals the constitution provides guidelines to their constitutional rights. Prisoners have limited constitutional rights which protect them and have the right to seek legal action but which is also limited and procedural. Inmates have the right to be free from cruel punishments, sexual harassment, discrimination right to complain of bad prison conditions and right to medical care. In a situation where a prisoner seeks for justice, the litigation process is handled in a different manner.

According to Prison Litigation Reform Act, lawsuits presented by prisoners before the courts for hearing and administering justice have certain restrictions which were derived from the Prison Litigation Reform Act. Therefore those prisoners seeking for justice from the courts against unconducive confinement and injurious punishment may have their cases dismissed. The Act states that a prisoner is advised to channel the complaints through the prison's grievance system and meet all the rules of procedure of the system and failure to this may deny one access to justice. An inmate may not be compensated for "mental or emotional injury" unless "prior showing of the physical injury" is made. The federal courts have no power to enforce an order that may limit the overcrowding in prisons. The Prison Litigation Reform Act was essentially meant to minimize the number of frivolous lawsuits presented before the courts, since it may be helpful as well as harmful to the corrections if courts give full attention to those lawsuits (Palmer, 2014).

Prisoners have been given constitutional rights which may be considered to be important but the violation of the rights has not been fully taken care of. The amendment of the Prison Litigation Reform Act may be important at this time because with the few lawsuits filed, a good number have succeeded. It will be a better step taken if the Act is changed to a level of consideration of both the wellbeing of inmates and that of the criminal justice system, that is, the courts and corrections.

Factors Influencing Resistance to Change

Change is the transformation from one point to another with an aim of making improvements in what was previously in place. Change necessitates new methods of carrying out routine activities. Change is only possible if everyone within an organization fully participates and advocates for change. For change to take place every stakeholder must be fully aware of the importance that will be brought about by the change and be allowed to fully take part in the process of making a change. Although an organization may need to make a change in how it functions but in the process of bringing the intended change, the transformation may fail to be effective based on various factors.

Some of the factors that may cause someone to resist change may include inadequate understanding of why change is needed. Such a shortcoming make people lose the idea of why there is need to bring change. In a position where people have the ideologies that the current way of carrying out things is still ideal, to them change may not be an issue of concern. For instance, public organizations such as the criminal justice system which has had no changes for more than a decade may feel no big importance of making some changes in its structures for better administration of criminal laws.

The realization that the change will not be beneficial to one group but will instead benefit the other group within an organization may trigger cooperation resistance. Fear of the change which is not known at that time may arise and make people not to accept change. Incompetent members may feel that the change will make them not to deliver especially changing to a new routine when the previous one was full of comforts hence may make them stick to their current way of conducting themselves (Hon, Bloom & Crant, 2014).

In any steps to bring change, resistance must be expected since not all will be of the opinion of change because of several factors. To deal with change resistance proper steps must be taken. The causes must be properly identified and be formally addressed. All the causes must be properly dealt with to make those resisting to comply with the change put in place.

Advertisement in the Legal Profession

Legal advertisement is the advertisement of lawyers and legal firms. According to one of the laws guiding legal advertisement, in the legal profession adverts may be done in publications, radio, television and any other recorded or written media, however, the use of some social networking sites has been restricted due to fear of manipulation and misguidance. These adverts have a guideline which is expected and are free from any form of misleading, for example, giving unrealistic expectations especially in what the lawyer is unable to do. The contents should not be misrepresented. Contact information, varieties of services available, fees charged are some of the legal contents of a legal advertisement.

Advertisement in the legal profession has been highly valued by some of the clients and the members of the public. Legal advertisements have been considered to be educative to clients since they have at some point in time provided guidelines on legal rights. These adverts have helped people identify affordable attorneys and keep off from lawyers who do not offer quality assistance. The adverts provide the public with the knowledge of legal services available provided they are within the professional guidelines. Proponents have it that making legal advertisements is more of democratic than demeaning to members of the profession.

Despite the significant proposition of the legal advertisement, criticism has emerged over the shortcomings of these adverts. Legal advertising has however been opposed for various reasons. Legal advertisement has been considered as lowering the dignity of the legal profession since lawyers are meant to protect civil rights and institutions and the legal profession is not mainly for profit-seeking. Members of the legal system need to be more concerned with serving the public rather than amassing profits. When a lawyer advertises and manages to get a big number of clients, the services they offer do not meet...