Law and Justice Relationship Philosophy - Essay Example

Humans have some innate knowledge of what is important and good in human life and because of this, we should not be constrained by laws and rules but by what our minds tell us what is right and just in the circumstances. The laws do not expressly provide on how to deal with this specific situation and judgment must then be made on moral principles. Permanent laws are incompatible with changing demographics and technology. Laws must change at the same pace as the rest of society to maintain society's current perspective of justice and righteousness, but time delays in passing laws preclude his.

Still now, the public waits for tougher dog laws to be passed on pit bulls and others alike. Even worse, there is no guarantee administration will be efficient. Here, Plato argues, rules fail to meet the differences of time and there is a need for rulers to exercise discretion as it encourages efficiency. Where rules fail to take into account specific, exceptional cases, Aristotle claims, ether unity should apply. Judges should correct errors of the law, rising from oversight by the lawmakers, given there are rules to be corrected in the first place.

This is, therefore, an argument to being ruled by laws. Favourers by a democracy where government by a collective of good men is better than being ruled by an absolute king. Decisions ought to be made by a democratically elected assembly. Unlike Plato's idea of 'permanence', offices and positions will be rotated; enforcing the idea that everyone is equal, and everyone should both rule and be ruled. The practice of using legal precepts to decide disputes was criticized by American Legal Realists as either redundant or pernicious.

Disputes, it is said, should be decided justly. Where legal precepts dictate the same outcome as that of justice, and then legal precepts are redundant--acting justly will achieve the same results as following the precept. Where legal precepts recommend a different result than that recommended by thane then following the releaser pernicious. The result is, in the words of Jerome Frank, "injustice is according to law." (Frank, 1936) Most people are of a similar opinion when confronted with what appears to be the "unjust" application of a rule to a particular situation.