Contemporary Criminality: A Take on Public Opinions and the Criminal Justice System

“Haal kaisa hai janaab kaa, Kya khayaal hai aap kaa,” these are the lyrics of the evergreen song written by Majrooh Sultanpuri and sung by the legends Asha Bhosale & Kishore Kumar. When translated into English these lyrics mean – “How is he doing, what do you think about him?”

When humans are asked about their opinions, about other human beings that surround them, it would be close to impossible to not take into account their opinion on the workings of their social world, which the Criminal Justice System is, in some capacity, closely a part of.

When put through a simple google search the word ‘Public Opinion’ means ‘views prevalent among the public.’ As a definition, it is apt, but the question in front of us is where public opinion finds its roots, how it comes into the larger light, and does it have any impact on our Criminal Justice System and Law Making & Executing Entities.

To understand ‘Public Opinion’, we need to understand ‘Opinion Formation’. What shapes our opinion?

Edwin Sutherland’s ‘Differential Association Theory’, delves into the fact the criminal behavior is learned through interactions with other, i.e. you learn from your surroundings. Opinions are formulated in a similar manner. The conversations you partake in, the media you consume, the shows and movies you watch all affect your opinion formation in a way unique to them.

However, this is a rather contemporary outlook, coherent to the modern technological times. If we go back a few decades to a time where the only source of information was news spread through the word-of-mouth. The opinions present, were common to the majority, as it was derived from the same source, the supreme authority of the State or the King. Even if there were people with bifurcating opinions, their fate was not the kindest of all.

This can be understood through the concept of ‘Obedience’ in Social Psychology. It is the change of an individual’s behavior to comply with a demand by an authority figure. People often comply with the request because they are concerned about a consequence if they do not comply.

Switching back to the 21st Century, our sources of capturing information have been diversified. The Greek philosopher Plato said, "Opinion is the medium between knowledge and ignorance". What he meant by this was, an opinion should be based on knowledge of the topic and correct understanding to make an impact in society. This poses the question ‘How truthful our sources of information are?’

The influence of Media, in today’s times, make us question, “Is the ‘Freedom of Speech' misused?” The accused is always highlighted as bad guy, the reason is never delved into. Recent crimes have also sprung the conversation of whether the genre of content we consume affects how we view a crime, who is a criminal in our minds? Is what we see equivalent to what we perceive, as aren’t movies a reflection and representation of the society?

However, this argument would be incomplete if the other side wouldn’t be presented. The media agencies have also helped spread awareness many-a-times, this can be seen when we talk about the LGBTQ+ community.

With the advent of complex algorithms analysing our preferences to personalize the content we come across, it can be inferred that we are shown what we want to see.

Along with that, the degree of interconnectedness we share with people in every nook and corner of the world, drives us on to a path where we don’t see plain, unbiased news, but news coated with a pre-formulated opinion of the mass. In simple words, our opinions are formed for us, we don’t form them ourselves.

In a democratic, culturally and religiously plural, country like India, 'Public Opinion' plays an important political role. Along with that these opinions are influenced by our caste, class, socio-economic backgrounds, family, societal, cultural, and religious beliefs.

The number of clashing opinions that came up about the Ram Mandir and the Sushant Singh Rajput case shows how religion, and the media can influence our biases, respectively.

This is where the debate between ‘Populism’ and ‘Democratization’ comes into play. Politicians are an indispensable part of a representative democracy, and so are elections, and the result of elections are based of the opinions and choice of the people. This results in Politicians highlighting the opinion that comes forth the most, and this popular opinion might not necessarily be for the welfare or benefit of the state.

This is the same with the opinions on the Criminal Justice System. The loudest opinion is held on, not only by the Politicians, but by news agencies that broadcast the same everywhere.

The aftermath of the Nirbhaya Case is a starking example.

It generated immense international outrage and was condemned by the United Nations Entity for Gender Equality and the Empowerment of Women, who called on the Government of India and the Government of Delhi "to do everything in their power to take up radical reforms, ensure justice and reach out with robust public services to make women’s lives more safe and secure".

This heinous incident took the nation by storm, with the mass demanding stringent legislation. A Judicial Committee, with J.S. Verma as the head was appointed 6-days after the incident, they received 80,000 suggestions and petitions from public, jurists, lawyers, Non-Governmental Organisations and women’s groups, in less than a month.

All that led to the amendments of the provisions dealing with Sexual Offences in the erstwhile Indian Penal Code, 1860, Indian Evidence Act, 1872, and the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 and as well as the Juvenile Justice Act, 2015 (valid and enforceable as of April 2025). This is the Power of Public Opinion.

The 3 organs of the government, the Legislative, the Executive, and the Judiciary, are also in their own ways affected by the Public Opinion. The Legislative, the law-making body of the nation, has to have a nuanced and holistic outlook on the laws they make. The Farmer Bills of 2020 had to be repealed due to the concerns raised by the farming community.

The Law Ministry had to withdraw the Advocates Amendment Bill after key objections from lawyers and the Bar Council. This depicts how the opinions of the public affect the Legislative’s activities.

The Executive, the body implementing the laws, also has to be wary of the Public Opinions. Moreso, it is a reflection of the public opinion. The Los Angeles Police Department (LAPD) and its infamous racist character, depicted their blackphobic nature which was shared by a part of the residents, especially in the early 1990’s in the State of California, in the United States of America.

The executive can also tend to have gender-skewed approaches, like the Cambridge University Press, Journal of Public Policy (Volume 42, Issue 1), ‘Do policy clashes between the judiciary and the executive affect public opinion? Insights from New Delhi’s odd–even rule against air pollution’ looks into.

Another aspect to the Executive influencing the Public Opinion is that when the public is aware that the police body is more stringent about certain rule, they will be cautious about the same. On the other hand, if the area is prone to certain crimes happening, the police will have an eye towards that at all times.

Now, the Judiciary, cannot be influenced directly. It works on a pre-determined set of rules, which have been written down. The Judiciary to work on the principles of Justice, Equity and Good Conscience, has to follow the codes. The way Public Opinion affect the working of the Judiciary is thus, indirect.

The effect of Public Opinion can be seen when it comes to the sentencing. The degree of the severity of the sentence can be influenced but only to an extent, and shouldn’t it be that way?

Can we trust the public opinion enough to let it affect the organs of our government? Social Psychology talks about 2 concepts: Conformity and Compliance.

‘Conformity’ is the change in a person’s behavior to go along with the group, even if he does not agree with the group. Peer pressure can lead us to stand by beliefs we might not agree in entirety. Findings reveal that conformity is more likely to occur when responses are public than when they are private, this is the reason government elections require voting in secret, so we are not coerced by others.

When someone’s vote changes if it is made in public versus private, this is known as ‘Compliance’. Compliance can be a form of conformity. Compliance is going along with a request or demand, even if you do not agree with the request. This can happen when the said person has more authority over you, like a boss or a manager.

However, Public Opinion can also be a tool in elevating the voices of the marginalized sections of the society, as well as those most impacted and affected by the crime and justice processes. This requires us to go out of the ordinary sample space, and survey out all sections of the society.

The K. M. Nanavati case, lead to the abolishment of the Jury System in India, it has its perks. In a Jury Trial, a group of people are chosen at random to hear the evidence and decide if the accused is guilty or not guilty (definition by nidirect).

America follows the Jury System, where the jury represents a cross-section of the community, and they actively participate in deciding the outcome of legal disputes brought to trial.  In this case, the Public Opinion is formulated through a proper process, all the evidence are set before them, a bias coming through is less probable, but certain prejudices can still surface.

While proving someone guilty in a Criminal Trial, it has to be done beyond reasonable doubt, any public opinion can be taken in a reasonable amount. The purpose of the Criminal Justice System is not only to serve justice to the victim, but to ensure that no one gets wrongly convicted, and the ones who are at fault get adequate punishments, that lead to their rehabilitation and reintegration into the society.

 

This writeup is inspired by the paper titled "Public Opinion, Crime, and Criminal Justice" by Mike Hough and Julian V. Roberts.