Current Implications

The word "justice" is being used a lot in the summer of 2020, usually in the phrase "Justice for
George Floyd" or "Justice for Breonna Taylor" or "racial justice." But few people seem to be
unpacking what the term "justice" means. It is hard to understand how defunding the police
would bring justice to George Floyd or Breonna Taylor, although, some might argue it would
mean their deaths were not in vain. But let's unpack the notion of justice in the context of
this summer's events. More...

Justice is action in accordance with the requirements of some law. Whether these rules are
grounded in human consensus or societal norms, they are supposed to ensure that all
members of society receive fair treatment. Issues of justice arise in several different spheres
and play a significant role in causing, perpetuating, and addressing conflict. Just institutions
tend to instill a sense of stability, well-being, and satisfaction among society members, while
perceived injustices can lead to dissatisfaction, rebellion, or revolution. Each of the different
spheres expresses the principles of justice and fairness in its own way, resulting in different
types and concepts of justice: distributive, procedural, retributive, and restorative. These
types of justice have important implications for socio-economic, political, civil, and criminal
justice at both the national and international level.[1]

Distributive justice, or economic justice, is concerned with giving all members of society a
"fair share" of the benefits and resources available. However, while everyone might agree
that wealth should be distributed fairly, there is much disagreement about what counts as a
"fair share." Some possible criteria of distribution are equity, equality, and need. (Equity
means that one's rewards should be equal to one's contributions to a society, while
"equality" means that everyone gets the same amount, regardless of their input. Distribution
on the basis of need means that people who need more will get more, while people who
need less will get less.) Fair allocation of resources, or distributive justice, is crucial to the
stability of a society and the well-being of its members. Different people will define "fair"
differently: some will say that fairness is equity; others equality; still others, need. When
issues of distributive justice are inadequately addressed and the item to be distributed is
highly valued, intractable conflicts frequently result. This was the essence of the conflicts
playing out across Europe and in United States politics in 2012-2013--over taxes, deficits,
"austerity programs," jobs, rights of labor, etc. It is part of the story about the racial conflicts
which have taken a high profile in the summer of 2020, although procedural and retributive
justice is also a large part of this conflict.

Procedural justice is concerned with making and implementing decisions according to fair
processes that ensure "fair treatment." Rules must be impartially followed and consistently
applied in order to generate an unbiased decision. Those carrying out the procedures should
be neutral, and those directly affected by the decisions should have some voice or
representation in the decision-making process. (See the essay on public participation.) If
people believe procedures to be fair, they will be more likely to accept outcomes, even ones
that they do not like. Implementing fair procedures is central to many dispute resolution
procedures, including negotiation, mediation, arbitration, and adjudication.

Mark Amstutz, a professor at Wheaton College, finds fault with retributive approaches to
justice because they do not pay sufficient attention to how individuals are to reconstruct their
lives.
Retributive justice appeals to the notion of "just desert" -- the idea that people deserve to be
treated in the same way they treat others. It is a retroactive approach that justifies
punishment as a response to past injustice or wrongdoing.[2] The central idea is that the
offender has gained unfair advantage through his or her behavior, and that punishment will
set this imbalance straight. In other words, those who do not play by the rules should be
brought to justice and deserve to suffer penalties for their transgressions. The notion of
deterrence also plays in here: the hope is that the punishment for committing a crime is large
enough that people will not engage in illegal activities because the risk of punishment is too
high. In addition to local, state, and national justice systems, retributive justice also plays a
central role in international legal proceedings, responding to violations of international law,
human rights, and war crimes.

However, because there is a tendency to slip from retributive justice to an emphasis on

revenge, some suggest that restorative justice processes are more effective. While a
retributive justice approach conceives of transgressions as crimes against the state or nation,
restorative justice focuses on violations as crimes against individuals. It is concerned with
healing victims' wounds, restoring offenders to law-abiding lives, and repairing harm done to
interpersonal relationships and the community. Victims take an active role in directing the
exchange that takes place, as well as defining the responsibilities and obligations of
offenders. Offenders are encouraged to understand the harm they have caused their victims
and take responsibility for it. Restorative justice aims to strengthen the community and
prevent similar harms from happening in the future. At the national level, such processes are
often carried out through victim-offender mediation programs, while at the international
level restorative justice is often a matter of instituting truth and reconciliation commissions.
Four Types of Justice
 

There are four types of justice that people can seek when they have been wronged.

Distributive justice
Distributive justice, also known as economic justice, is about fairness in what people
receive, from goods to attention. Its roots are in social order and it is at the roots of
socialism, where equality is a fundamental principle.
If people do not think that they are getting their fair share of something, they will seek first
to gain what they believe they deserve. They may well also seek other forms of justice.

Procedural justice
The principle of fairness is also found in the idea of fair play (as opposed to the fair
share of distributive justice).
If people believe that a fair process was used in deciding what it to be distributed, then
they may well accept an imbalance in what they receive in comparison to others. If they
see both procedural and distributive injustice, they will likely seek restorative and/or
retributive justice.

Restorative justice
The first thing that the betrayed person may seek from the betrayer is some form of
restitution, putting things back as they should be.
The simplest form of restitution is a straightforward apology. Restoration means putting
things back as they were, so it may include some act of contrition to demonstrate one is
truly sorry. This may include action and even extra payment to the offended party.
Restorative justice is also known as corrective justice.

Retributive justice
Retributive justice works on the principle of punishment, although what constitutes fair
and proportional punishment is widely debated. While the intent may be to dissuade the
perpetrator or others from future wrong-doing, the re-offending rate of many criminals
indicates the limited success of this approach.
Punishment in practice is more about the satisfaction of victims and those who care about
them. This strays into the realm of revenge, which can be many times more severe than
reparation as the hurt party seeks to make the other person suffer in return. In such cases
'justice' is typically defined emotionally rather that with intent for fairness or prevention.

So what?
If you have been wronged, consider carefully what kind of justice you are really seeking.
If you are the wrong-doer and others are seeking justice against you, seek first to ensure
distributive justice.
A question may be asked why people are put in prison. If it is to prevent them re-offending,
then it is restorative justice. If it is to punish them, then it is retributive justice. Sadly, this
have proven a poor method of prevention.