What is Justice - Essay Example

of the of the Concerned 15 December 2009 What is Justice? Realistically speaking, no other abstract concept affiliates to the parameters of broad-baseness and multifariousness, as the concept of justice. Usually, people prefer to associate the concept of justice with law and legal systems. The fact is that, the concept of justice and the institution of law stand to be as far as part as the notions of the ideal and the practical. If one explores into the origins of the concept of justice, its genesis could be traced as far back as to the advent of the ideas of religion and law. Since times immemorial, mankind has been trying hard and incessantly, to establish such societies or to mould the already established societies, in consonance with the ideals of honesty, fairness, equity and truth. There exists no valid cause or explanation as to the humanities predilection for these higher ideals, but for the primordial basic instinct to opt for a higher ground in individual and collective matters and the results deduced by societies through experience and trial. The institution of law and the prevalent legal systems are no doubt a direct outcome of humanities preference for justice. However, it goes without saying that justice is an ideal and like all ideals is to a great extent unachievable in totality. However, the mankind realized a long time ago that the impossibility of the achievement of the ideal of justice does not mean that societies should desist from incorporating it within their social and ethical frameworks. That is why it came out with law and legal systems. Thus, simply speaking, justice is the pole star that is inaccessible and far placed and law is the essential human institution that aspires to tow the direction shown by the ideal of justice. Hence, justice is something pure, ephemeral and perfect, while the law is something, which is manmade and hence evolutionary and alterable in its spirit. So, justice is a concept that is much bigger than the institution of law or the institutional provisions like legal procedures and legal remedies. Justice is a concept that raises almost as many questions as the solutions it facilitates. What is justice? Should the legal systems be theological or ethical in their approach or must be secular in their perspective? What principles ought to constitute the foundations of justice in society that are equity, egalitarianism, meritocracy or aristocracy? Should justice be made accessible freely and without cost or should it be paid for to check its abuse? Since eons, these questions has been analyzed and delved upon by theologians, philosophers, jurists and intellectuals, from multiple vantage points and diverse perspectives. Hence, variegated have been the results and conclusions ensuing from these deliberations. Besides, the incorporation of the ethic of fairness into the concept of justice is essentially a modern phenomenon, as justice has been traditionally seen as being associated with religion and divine providence. Utilitarianism looks towards the concept of justice with an eye on consequential ramifications (Miller & Hashmi ed. 45). Restorative school of justice believes in being benign to both the victim and the accused (Miller & Hashmi ed. 49). Retributive philosophy holds that a penalty ought to be proportionate to safeguard its just credentials (Miller & Hashmi ed. 54). Distributive justice aspires to make way for a society based on equity (Miller & Hashmi ed. 61). The contradictory aspirations and agenda of the diverse schools of philosophy and jurisprudence gave way to multifarious constitutional, social and legal issues. For example if one tries to pacify the utilitarian moorings, the doling out of punishment to a victim with an eye on the future developments, it may give way to an unnecessary victimization of an accused. Similarly, it is pragmatically impossible for a court of law to be considerate to both the victim and the accused at the same time, so as to be restorative in the delivery of justice. Also, if a legal system tries to do justice to retributive aspirations by being proportionate in its verdicts, it ignores the conclusions arrived at by the utilitarian and restorative genres of justice. When one considers this dilemma, the entire concept of justice appears to be relative in its application. After considering the before mentioned facts, it would be true to conclude that justice is a concept that is optimally viable in free and democratic countries and societies only. Democratic societies not only frame laws by exposing them to diverse and alternate perspectives; the delivery of justice in these societies is also guided by a universal access to law and legal representation and a variegated interpretation of law. The ideal of justice stands a chance only in those societies, which are open to diverse and varied interpretations and applications of law. In such a scenario, all the involved parties and individuals get a chance to explain and convey their views and perspectives. Oft one comes across situations where the rights of the accused conflict with the rights of the society. This do gives way to ambiguous and confusing scenarios. The thing to be kept in mind is that though the concept of justice and the institution of law exist to protect the integrity of the society and to safeguard and uphold its collectively held ideals and ethics, still, before the arrival of a credible conclusion through a fair trial, an accused stands to be as much a part of the society as any other person. The premise cherished in all the modern societies is that an accused is always innocent till proven guilty. Hence, access to a free trial and legal representation in a court of law is the minimal right that ought to be granted to any accused (Encyclopedia Britannica: Online). Of course, the notion of a fair trial includes within its ambit, an access to speedy justice, protection against unnecessary and prolonged incarnation and the right to remain silent (Encyclopedia Britannica: Online). The existence of the courts of law in democratic societies stands to be the ultimate validation of the rights of the society and the extension of some basic and essential rights to an accused in the dispensation of justice only further bolsters any worthwhile society. This is well understood when one considers the summary executions and illegal incarcerations in the name of justice, in the totalitarian regimes like the communist China or the erstwhile Soviet Union. Many experts and scholars tend to argue that the conflict between due processes and the individual rights stands to be a big impediment in the way of justice in modern societies (Ides & May 67). In fact, the reality is just the other way round. Modern societies are such societies that allow for the existence of a diversity of opinion and ways of life. Besides, law is also an institution that could never be declared to be perfect and, which evolves with the passage of time and with the influx of new ideas. Thus any due process in the area of law and justice that refuses to respond to the changing norms and shies away from the obligation of safeguarding new rights that were hitherto left unconsidered, is akin to being called oppressive in its approach. It is not a surprise that most of the free and developed societies have legally recognized the rights of the sidelined and marginalized segments of the society like the colored people, ethnic minorities and gays and lesbians, while the underdeveloped nations are still grappling with such unsatisfied aspirations. Therefore, there is no denying the fact that justice is a concept that is always open to relative interpretations, by the very nature of its broad scope. Hence, the biggest achievement that a society could boast of is to allow its legal system to imbibe this relative and variegated aspect of justice, so as to be positively evolutionary and fresh in its approach and scope. Total Words: 1300 words (5 pages and 50 words) Works Cited Ides, A & May, CN. Constitutional Law , Individual Rights. Aspen Publishers: New York, 2006. Miller, DL & Hashmi, SH (ed.). Boundaries and Justice: Diverse Ethical Perspectives. Princeton University Press: Princeton, 2001. “Rights of Accused”. Encyclopaedia Britannica. 2009. Encyclopaedia Britannica Online. 15 Dec 2009 Read More