The author accepts Terrel Don Hutto's definition of privatization as the 'nongovernmental performance of a function.' Privatization is discussed for the following criminal justice functions: crime prevention; crime investigation; detection of criminals; accusation of criminals; the apprehension, diversion, detention, and protection of criminals; the prosecution, adjudication, and disposition of cases; and the retribution, incapacitation, intimidation, rehabilitation, and reintegration of convicts. Privatization is also discussed for the protection, restitution, socialization, and deterrence of the community, as well as the restoration and restitution of victims. Overall, the author concludes that the time has come to move from existing instances of privatization to its innovative use in every aspect of criminal justice, so as to provide a comparative measure of the cost effectiveness of various methods of performing criminal justice functions.