Comparative Legal Culture of the Ferguson Situation - Essay Example

Comparative Legal Culture The Ferguson conflict Ferguson, in Missouri has grown to be a back dominated with a higherpopulation of African Americans as compared to the Whites. The recent past has recorded cases of blacks and whites mistrust with the Black Americans alleging social injustices especially from the police department. This was worsened with the shooting of a black teenager by a white police man whom the grand jury acquitted citing lack of probable cause to indict him. The decision of the grand jury and the declaration of the state of emergency saw protests and anger from the public especially the blacks and human rights activists who claim that the city has been tainted with flagrant racism, police impunity and or the systematic quashing of free speech. In this paper, we shall discuss the Ferguson situation in light of the Natural law, Karl Marx and legal formalism theories of law. In advancing the Natural Law Aquinas states that it is in the human nature to act freely so as to achieve their proper end through reason and free will. The proper end in this concept was to live, be sustained and to reproduce. It thus followed that any law that did not see this end achieved was unjust and thus no law. Hobbes in advancing the need of humans to achieve the proper end cited above, he summarizes nine laws that are aimed to achieve the applicability of the natural law by stating that one should not do to another that which one will not want done to thyself, as this was the best way of preserving human life, sustenance and reproduction. John Locke states that where a ruler goes against natural law and fails to preserve life, liberty and property then the people would be justified to overthrow the existing state and create a new one. He further echoes the biblical concept of equality that is largely borrowed by Thomas Jefferson in the declaration of Independence and the ultimate U.S Constitution. It is on this note that the Social Contractual theory by Jean Rousseau will come in handy in advancing the natural law. That at the state of nature humans would not have defended themselves enough and therefore they gave all the power to the sovereign hold in trust and in return protect them. Rousseau presents that in a democracy, the government ought to be focused on representing the general will of the sovereign, the sovereign in this context being the people. The natural law is theory seeks to protect morality in a state and what is immoral and inhuman would be short of law and hence unenforceable. To put the natural law into the Ferguson conflict, the Ferguson black society feels that their natural need to live and survive is at a serious risk. It also follows that the equality in the eyes of the Ferguson people is but a myth and only paper work found in the American Constitution but is not a reality. The life of the teenager was cut shot by the White police man who the authority or the government agent. The natural law would have called for the police to protect the young boy’s life rather than end it. It is in the interest of natural justice that every one be treated equal before the law, that individuals should be tried first in the court of law before being branded with guilt. The killing of the unarmed boy as the witnesses attested is undermining the natural justice so advanced by the Natural Law. The uproar on the non-indictment of the police officer who shot the teenager and the subsequent protests are an indication of a dissatisfied sovereign, that is the people whom having given the jury the authority to administer justice saw that the decision was less what they could quantify to amount to what did not represent the general will of the Ferguson residents. It raises more equality issues that the jury that made the non-indictment decision was composed of six whites as opposed to the 3 black Americans. The right to equality and to be treated fairly before the law in this context is placed on a questionable ground as the public expected justice to their fallen teenager who was unarmed at the time he was shot but instead of the Jury presenting a better position on this, found no probable cause to indict the Police but instead he had been sent to an administrative leave. Human Right issues call for measures protection of the same as they are inherent to all irrespective if their race. The declared state of emergency was furthered to prevent the right to speech and movement of the Ferguson people who are the s sovereign. It is even worse that many were arrested and heavy military deployed to quash any exercise of their natural right to protest against the decision that was unjust and hence unnatural in the eyes of the Ferguson people, the black people in the US and the Human Rights Activists. Karl Max in his Marxist Theory propounds that society consists of classes. These classes would always comprise of the upper class being those who have abundance and are in leisure while the lower class consisted of those on hardships and poverty. Basically, there exists inequality among the individuals in a society. According to this theory this equality is inherent. The upper classes have the means of production and the lower classes with no means of production are the laborers to the upper class. It thus follows that the upper class become richer and richer while the lower classes continue languishing in poverty. The upper class is said to make laws and decisions that favour them expecting them to apply to all. The law herein made and enforced is a mechanism for holding the lower class obedient to the upper class and does not seek to promote any human rights whatsoever. David and Brieley in advancing the same theory present law as a superstructure that in reality translates the interests of those who hold the gear of command. They further state that law is a means to exercise dictatorship and exploiting the lower class and is only just from the point of the rulings class. The Marxists equate justice to a theoretical idea that only vests on the rulings class and that which does not benefit the lower class in any sense but meant to benefit the upper class that have the production tools and hence control the general society. The Ferguson community presents the typical society addresses in the Marxist theory with the Whites taking up the upper class while the black Americans taking up the lower class. Human rights and equality is but a myth as the ruling class or the authorities occupy different positions of class with the black Americans. The Black people see themselves being unjustly treated by the law, the law enforcers and the law interpreters. The life of the teenage boy was not a point of interest to the enforcers and even the jury as the police who is to be considered as the ruling class or the upper class had higher rights of protecting himself and his life than sparing the life of the boy. The reaction of the government by deploying the military troops and even declaring the state of emergency was a means to silence the lower class. The law and the jury aided the rulings class. Justice in this sense is one sided. To the police who shot the teenager justice was served but to the teenager’s family and black community there was no justice. In the context of Karl Marx Theory of law, there can never be equality as every society is stratified and the rulings classes have dominance and rights over the lower class. The lower class can only achieve this dominance by overthrowing the ruling class. However, on common grounds the rule of the upper class is predominant and equality or human rights would not be a subject to be advanced by the blacks as it is for the upper class, being the white and the police. A critical and an in depth look at the natural law, it follows that law is eternal. Law is viewed to be inherent with human being born with particular inherent rights that should not be deprived from them and such a deprivation would be unjust and hence an unjust law ought not to be law. The natural law focuses much to norms as it advances what is moral and what is immoral in the view of a naturalist. The general approach to the natural law is that every one is equal before the law and therefore justice should be the basis of any decisions made. The effect thereof is ssen in the social contract that where the general will of the people is not upheld, human rights infringed or where the government fails to protect the rights of the sovereign who are the people, then the sovereign has the powers to overthrow that government. The Marxist theory on the other hand addresses real issues in many societies, the issues of social strata. According to Marx, the origin of law is the rulings class. It thus follows that the ruling class can vary the laws to suit them at the expense of the lower class who are the subordinates and have to obey the commands of the ruling class. In this sense the ruling class is the sovereign and the only rights that matter are those that favour them. In any case in such situations the human rights are insignificant and dictatorship is the order of the day. The indifferences have always occasioned revolts and radical movements that are aimed at doing away with the classes and so the laws too to bring equality in the society. The Ferguson conflict is one that addresses human rights and the need to have these rights respected. The black Americans versus the whites racial fight is a historical issue that is a rebirth of a skeleton long buried and an embarrassment to the spirit of the American Constitution. The rights embodied in the bill of rights advancing equality among people and respect to life were a deep cry of Thomas Jefferson whose desire was to see the American people becoming one. Many leaders have expressed their concern to have racial integration and harmony with no specs of whom is or isn’t white or black. The present conflict is retrogression to the steps that had been made to deal with racial injustices and police impunity. The right to life is a fundamental human right that should not be infringed but only in circumstances beyond our human means. It is the duty of the police to protect the life, survival and liberty of all whether black or white. This is also the position that the law interpreters should advance and at no point should they encourage racial mistrust as seen in the recent conflict. The consequences that come with using one theory or the other in legal interpretation is glaringly conspicuous. While the natural theory pays attention to the equality clause and the morals of the society, the Karl Marx theory propagates that there is no equality in any given society and thus the ruling class have the upper hand in enforcing their issues. It also follows that Karl Marx sees no need for advancement of human rights as this is but tertiary in the theory advancing. Advancement of human rights in the Natural law Theory is fundamental as all human have inherent rights that they are born with and should at no point be infringed. It thus follows that while advancing the natural law theory then attention has to be paid in advancing the interests of the sovereign whom in this context are the people. On the contrary, the Marxist theory will suggest that the will of the sovereign will thus be that of the upper or rulings class. The choice of the theory will determine the ultimate decision and the reaction of the people. It is thereof of great essence to consider the effects of that particular theory before advancing it. What has been termed just in one theory, is either unjust in the other or could even be none of the other theory’s business. Consequently when one theory emphasizes on human rights, others have nothing to do with these rights. The choice depends thus on an individuals’ legal jurisprudential standing. References McLellan, D. (2006). Karl Marx: his life and thought. Palgrave Macmillan. Firth, R. (January 01, 1979). Work and value: Reflections on ideas of Karl Marx. Social Anthropology of Work, 177-206. Read More