Examination of the Subject of Justice - Essay Example

Turn the pages of human history; neither the dictator’s gun nor the philosopher’s pen have been able to challenge the justice issue with success. Justice is a subject that is like a mirage for philosophers, politicians, sociologists, economists, and various types of non-governmental organizations. No two human beings are alike, their expectations are not alike, their reactions to the various life situations are not alike, and how then a uniform system of justice can be framed that satisfies the needs of all? Is it correct for an individual, when all the avenues for seeking justice are closed, to remain satisfied thinking about the platitude, ‘It is better to deserve without receiving than to receive without deserving? That would be the defeatist attitude towards life, and such a man would reach the dead end of the road in the pursuit of creativity in life. The greatest contributor in the hot race of securing justice is the concerned individual and not any outside agency. When one realizes that one is the creator of one’s destiny and not the victim, the gates for the mansion of justice will automatically open.

Aristotle suggests that justice occurs when everybody gets what they deserve. But the question is how to achieve that state? Does a man know what he deserves and at what level of internal and external progression he is placed? Self-introspection is the beginning of the process of seeking justice. Even the best governors of society can provide a reasonably good framework of rights within which individuals can follow their values, but that cannot be the perfect model that satisfies the cravings of one and all. Political activity at the highest form of its perfection will fall short of assuring good life to all.

Governance under all political philosophies is capitalism, communism, socialism, theocracy, fundamentalism and the like have failed to provide total justice to an individual. As such, the political establishment is not the panacea to secure equitable justice respecting individuals as free, rational agents. Mind-level arguments and counter-arguments, projects drew within the ideological boundaries, the approach of the governing agents that ‘whatever we say or do is correct’ will not lead to tangible results in the process of seeking justice. Historical forces and the current social and political interests intervene in the process of delivering justice to the people. Even the criminal justice system is not perfect. For example, let us take that life imprisonment is awarded for the offense of murder. Here, the result is the murder. But what is the issue that prompted an individual to commit the act of murder? The reasons will vary from individual to individual. From the moral angle, a murder may be an act of avenging a serious impropriety committed against the aggrieved party. In another instance, the murder might have been committed for looting valuables and cash. The motives for the murder are entirely different and by awarding life imprisonment in both cases, the purpose of ideal justice is not served.

So, Aristotle's articulation of the best regime may be an ardent wish and appeal, but the ground realities in the society at any given time, under any system of governance, will make achieving that state, impossibility. One can advance towards the pedestal of justice by implementing the check and balances and reward and punishment systems. Even to implement the rule of law, noble individuals are needed, and as such, the real issue is how to create noble individuals. The only course for securing justice in the real sense of the term is the spiritual option and the individual is the best judge to decide about the justice angle to his life.