USA: +1 415 256 4347 
Sign in
Criminal Justice Process: Civil Order Control
Student’s Name
Institutional Affiliation
Introduction
The world is changing fast due to consistent increase in population that has compelled people to connect at a global level in diverse spheres. This reality has prompted renewed focus on ways of strengthening institutions for enforcing laws and regulations to ensure that all individuals are controlled effectively without any human rights violations. As a way of maintaining harmony, governments continue to enact laws that advocate for the respect of basic human rights. In United States, various social institutions exist that promote law and order in the country. Specifically, the police service has a major legal responsibility in maintaining law and order in the United States. There are similarities and differences in the way nations incorporate systematic civil order laws. Accordingly, this study examines the approaches integrated by the U.S. government to manage civil order and to compare it with how civil order control is undertaken in other countries, specifically China, Japan, England and Saudi Arabia.
Civil Order Control in the United States
Civil order control describes the activities adopted by a country’s social institutions with the intent of upholding peace and order, in respect to the basic human rights of civilians. In the United States, the government has incorporated diverse laws that handle civil order control issues. The regulations allow the government to protect individuals from being denied their legal basic rights, with the intent of warranting order in the nation (Duff & Marshall, 2019). The police service is the main civil order control body in the U.S. The unit is tasked with the responsibility of respecting and upholding the rights of all civilians. They are obliged to avoid heightening disorder when handling prospective issues. The U.S. government has also created a civil plan that outlines procedures of managing civil issues such as criminal activities and general disorder. It also monitors the measures adopted by the police units in their effort to maintain law and order. Actually, the U.S. administration has done a lot to ensure that the police forces maintain civil order without overstepping the rights of the civilians.
While the police service has a clearly defined role in America, other government agencies in the country also have a major initiative in maintaining civil order. Police units are expected to liaise with civil order agencies such as the Federal Bureau of Investigations (FBI). The connection provides a platform for the police to appeal for assistance in case of adverse criminal activities and public disorder. Moreover, the government has established the Civilian Reserve Corps, which enables the police units to maintain peace during emergencies such as chaos. On the other hand, the government can contracted commercial private organizations to provide security personnel for controlling crowds and riots (Silver, 2017). Hence, the U.S. government upholds its autonomous role of deciding on the measures to adopt in the event of potential unrest in the country.
Altogether, it is clear that America has equipped the police force with all the power required to protect lives and property. In terms of civil order control, the police have a special role in imposing lockdowns in case they suspect potential criminal activities (Soss & Weaver, 2017). The government also limits the prevalence of violent public rallies to forestall prospective civil disorder.
Comparison of Civil Order in the U.S. and Other Nations
The U.S. has maintained a distinct role in continuing civil order through various agencies whose jurisdictions are clearly outlines in the country’s laws and regulations. As pointed out at the outset, the country’s civil order control mechanism shares certain fundamental similarities and subtle differences with those of other nations notably Saudi Arabia, Japan, England, and China. Like the United States, Japan upholds civil order through various government bodies. A major similarity between the U.S. and Japan is that both nations are dedicated to promoting human rights. Additionally, the nations have created and implemented laws that enable them to maintain peace and civil order. Conversely, the countries differ in the administration of their police units. In the U.S., the government controls the police body, whereas in Japan the police unit is controlled by the sovereign judiciary. Japan also ensures that all its civil order control objectives are subjected to scrutiny by the media.
In Saudi Arabia, all government functions are controlled according to the principles of the Sharia Laws which outline all the social, moral, religious and legal aspects evident in the Holy Quran. The major similarity between the country’s civil order control ecosystem with that of the United States is that the police are obliged to maintain law and order. However, the Saudi Arabian police force, also known as the Religious Police, is responsible for ensuring all civilians adhere to the Sharia Laws. In contrast, the U.S. police service does not require adherence to any religion in its enforcement of law and order.
In China, the government has incorporated diverse initiatives to reform the civil order system and enhance approaches of resolving conflict and unrest. The nation’s concept of maintaining public order includes the synchronization of national and local initiatives, and monopolization of police information and communications. Notably, both China and the U.S. view the police unit as the core national instrument of government control, which provides support to local administrative units and promotes public ethics (Dammer & Albanese, 2013). Additionally, the governments use law enforcing bodies to enable the police to maintain order in the countries. Contrariwise, the main difference is that U.S. law enforcement agencies work independently while their Chinese counterparts are controlled by the public security sector.
Like America, England has diverse governmental agencies, in addition to the police service, that oversee civil order in the nation. Some of the security agencies in England include the Terrorism Prevention and Investigations Measures (TPIM) Agency (Dammer & Albanese, 2013). In this regard, the perspective adopted in England is similar to that of the United Stated, whereby the latter relies on agencies such as the FBI to reinforce police efforts of maintaining law and order through domestic intelligence and investigative operations. Nevertheless, the governance structures set up to facilitate the operations of these institutions differ in the two countries. For example, suspected perpetuators of public unrest in the U.S. can only be prosecuted through a trial in a court of law. In contrast, the TPIM agency has some powers to punish, without any trial, individuals who in extraordinary cases cause, or pose a threat to, public disorder in an unprecedented scale.
Conclusion
Overall, certain similarities and differences exist in the way civil order control is carried out in the U.S. vis-à-vis in other nations. This situation is influenced by various factors such as socio-political and cultural frameworks on which the legal systems of those nations are anchored. In fact, all global legal systems exemplify the cultures, needs, and traditions of the denoted nations. Therefore, when it comes to the U.S., China, Japan, Saudi Arabia, and England, there exists several differences in their systems that influence their civil order control. Altogether, the nations have a mutual objective of maintaining peace and civil order, and it is for this reason that they have instituted comprehensive civil laws through different government units such as police operate to improve security and maintain civil order.
References
Dammer, H. R., & Albanese, J. S. (2013). Comparative criminal justice systems. Cengage Learning.
Duff, R. A., & Marshall, S. E. (2019). Crimes, Public Wrongs, and Civil Order. Criminal Law and Philosophy, 13(1), 27-48.
Silver, A. (2017). The demand for order in civil society: A review of some themes in the history of urban crime, police, and riot. In Theories and Origins of the Modern Police, 23-46. Routledge.
Soss, J., & Weaver, V. (2017). Police are our government: Politics, political science, and the policing of race–class subjugated communities. Annual Review of Political Science, 20, 565-591.
