The Term Justice Differs in Many Cultures - Essay Example

Justice The term justice has been in existence for thousands of years and it has been practiced by many cultures ascommunities have sought to ensure that all of their members achieve it. While the term justice differs in many cultures, there is the agreement that it is the achievement of that which is just. This means that in a case where an individual has been wronged, he has the right of either being compensated or ensuring that the person who has wronged him is punished. The justice system of the United States, at the time of its creation, was intended to ensure that justice was given to all of its citizens and this is the reason why it has endured to this day. There is a large and diverse criterion through which justice in society can be achieved and these include fairness, equity, impartiality, trust, among many others. Justice in society cannot be achieved without fairness within it because the latter is its fundamental attribute. In most cases, fairness is often considered to be synonymous with justice and this is essentially because in some cases, it is believed to come directly from God’s will. Fairness, as the will of God and as an attribute of justice comes about because of consensus within a community or society and it is believed to consist of rules that are common to all humanity (Spence 1998, p.3). It is as a result of this consensus that fairness is often considered to be higher than any legal system and it is a guideline towards achieving justice for all who have a claim to it. Therefore, it is in those cases where an action is considered to violate the agreed upon rules of fairness that it comes to be considered unjust and the perpetrator of this action tends to end up being punished. Fairness in the promotion of justice is an action which ensures that there is consideration for the proper interests, property as well as the safety of all individuals in society. Those who strive to achieve fairness in justice do so through the achievement of proper procedures which are not only comfortable, but also resemble the rules of a game. Fairness involves ensuring that people are able to receive benefits and burdens according to rules which have been set within a legal system. Social justice is related to fairness and it involves both restorative and retributive justice which is normally responses towards those who have violated the rules that have been agreed upon within a society. This form of justice requires that all individuals in a society accept its rules and ensure that these rules are fair so that justice can be achieved. The principle of equality also has a place in justice especially in such situations where there is a need to provide social or distributive justice. This principle is especially relevant in those situations where it is necessary to give people a form of treatment that they deserve, and this should be done in a manner that is fair (Rawls 1999, p.266). In general, this principle requires that individuals be rewarded for their efforts towards productivity in society, while they deserve to be punished in case they transgress the agreed upon rules in society. However, in most cases, the principle of equality and interests of certain members of society tend to come into conflict and this makes it extremely difficult to achieve justice for some individuals, even though they may deserve it. An example of this form of justice is through the development of a just economic structure which ensures that goods are distributed to persons according to their contribution within society. The abilities of individuals play a significant role in making sure that those who make better products or work harder are paid more than those who do not work hard. Despite equality being a valid principle of justice, it is often extremely difficult to achieve it because pursuing it to the latter would mean that not all members of society will have all their needs for justice met. Therefore, this principle is normally not adopted for its own sake but is included as part of justice in order to advance different forms of social goals. In this way, equality ensures that there is a more stress on the development of good interpersonal relationships by people within a society who as a result develop a sense of belonging rather than conflict. Impartiality by a third party has to be adopted as a means of achieving justice within legal proceedings or mediations because to do otherwise would mean that there would be a violation of individual right to justice (Spence 1998, p.16). Therefore, a third party has to refer to all information that is provided by both parties in an unbiased and logical manner and make a decision based on impartial conclusions. In such circumstances, judges or facilitators have to display utmost impartiality in such a way that they do not give an unfair advantage to one part and the other’s expense. In order to achieve this impartiality, it is essential for credible rules of engagement throughout the procedure to be set so that no party can be in a position of gaining favor from a judge or facilitator. A procedure which is not biased can make impartiality possible in the service of justice in making decisions because it will be consistent and will have the confidence of parties involved. In this way, like cases should be treated in the same manner since it makes possible a level playing field involved parties. A level playing field in a justice system through impartiality ensures that individuals from disadvantaged communities are given an equal say in attaining justice and do not have to let go of their interests for the sake of more privileged individuals. A central feature of impartiality in a justice system is that individuals who have been directly affected by an offense are given a say and are represented in the process of making a decision concerning what will happen to an offender. All major criteria of producing justice in society are interrelated and this is especially the case where there is a need for fairness as well. However, it is not uncommon to find instances where these principles are in conflict with one another. This is especially the case where there is conflict concerning which criteria should be applied in order to ensure that justice for individuals is achieved without any bias towards one party. Furthermore, there develop instances where individuals, especially third parties, think differently concerning the best way of implementing justice and this has often brought some form of conflict over fairness in decisions made. In society today, the conflicts which arise over decisions made in various cases might undermine principles which have been set up in society to ensure justice for its members as seen in the documentary The Thin Blue Line where an innocent man is sent to prison over a crime he did not commit (Lipson & Morris, 1988). As a result, some members of society might end up feeling alienated and withdraw their support for these principles and the institutions which support them, and this might lead to a rebellion with the intention of forming new institutions of justice. An example of this is the American Revolution which took place as a result of an inability by the British government to provide justice for people in its American colonies. In conclusion, while achieving justice can be considered to be a matter of common sense, it is often quite difficult to determine how it can be achieved in a manner where there is fairness and equality. However, justice is essential in the proper functioning of a society and to do without it would mean bringing about chaos. Therefore, principles of fairness, impartiality, and equality set out guidelines that can be used in making an orderly society possible through an impartial provision of justice. References Lipson, M. (Producer) & Morris, E. (Director). (1988). The Thin Blue Line (Documentary). United States: Miramax Film. Rawls, J. (1999). A Theory of Justice. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Spence, G. (1998). With Justice for None: Destroying an American Myth. New York: Crown Publishing Group. Read More