Individual rights and public order: balancing competing interests

Criminal Justice

The American criminal justice system attempts to balance the rights of the individual with the need for public order. Without a commitment to the preservation of individual rights, suspects could be detained indefinitely or may never receive a fair trial in a court of law. Cruel and unjust punishments would also infringe on individual rights. Preserving the absolute rights of individuals has been reflected in the American system of due process: the right to a fair trial and to be considered "innocent until proven guilty" by a court of law. The fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution guarantees the rights of the individual under due process of law, and ensures that no individual will be deprived of "life, liberty, or property" without due process ("Due Process" nd). Miranda rights are one of the most well-known examples of the American commitment to the preservation of individual rights. Law enforcement officials and criminal justice workers are obliged to protect individual rights in the interests of preserving a humanitarian and just democratic society.

On the other hand, law enforcement officials must the right of the community to enjoy safe streets. In the interests of preventing crime, law enforcement must sometimes restrict the rights of individuals. For example, a vandal does not have the freedom to smash store windows; his individual rights are curtailed in the interests of public order as well as in the interests of the individual rights of the victims of crime. Maintaining public order often requires the restriction of individual rights, as by prohibiting driving under the influence or by restricting the possession of pornography.

The American criminal justice system strikes a balance between individual rights and the right to public order through specific legislation. For example, individual rights are ensured through the outlawing of illegal searches and seizures. However, law enforcement officials can petition a judge to temporarily lift the ban and issue a warrant to search the private property of a suspect for the purposes of gathering evidence for use in a fair trial. One of the most controversial laws passed in favor of public order over individual rights was the U.S.A. PATRIOT Act. Passed in the wake of the September 11 terrorist attacks, the law permitted more leeway than had been previously granted to law enforcement officials. Searches, seizures, and wire tapping are some of the ways law enforcement officials can infringe on personal liberties and individual rights, with the ultimate goal of protecting public order.

Similarly, the Guantanamo Bay detainees have their individual rights restricted and because they are not American citizens their access to Constitutional rights is not guaranteed. The government has determined that impinging the rights of the individual detainees serves the best interests of the general public: a stance that has the nation up in arms about the ultimate purpose of the legal system and of the efficacy of due process of law.