Q 3 Identify one issue of global social justice, identify 

contemporary challenges and evaluate

various approaches to realize its successful resolution 
To begin with it is first important to define the social justice. Justice is something which
came from the latin word “Jungere” which means to tie or bound together or in other words it
means “JUS” bond or tie. Here justice means equal opportunity of rights with everyone. To
provide fair resolution to everyone.
Now, Social Justice is a concept that is a newcomer and hence if we search through the great
philosophers like Plato, Aristotle etc. and their school of thought in order to understand this
concept wasn’t one that was given much merit to be considered. S how this thought came into
being was via the Western thought and the political situation that was birthed out of the
Industrial revolution and the coming of the “Socialist doctrine”.
Justice at global level means that the issue which is renowned globally. Like for example the
difference between the global issue & domestic issue could be that the issue which is
prevelant for one countr could be not an issue for the other country. Like in 19th century the
public employment in US was not an issue as they were statisfied with their employment
growth but at that time it was an issue at another country.
One of the global issue which is related to justice & is equivalent to rights of community & to
prevent breach it is important to resolve the issue: Same sex marriage.
The first ever recorded same sex marriage came from Middle English in 1250 to 1300 CE. At
that time the main goal of a marriage was to act as an Alliance between the families. With
time this concept altered. Today no longer is marriage only for an alliance between parties. It
is also for love, compatibility a harmonious and a kindred relationship between the parties. It
is the beginning of a family. A lifelong commitment. Today right to marry is a universal right
applicable to all. It is provided in Human Rights Charter under the heading of right to start a
family, under Art. 16 of Universal declaration of Human rights, under Art 23 of International
covenant on Civil and political rights 1996. However, this privilege of ease of marriage is
applicable only when the parties are of opposite sexes. Majority of same sex couples have
faced and continue two face issues in getting married in different places across the world.
They are denied of their right to choose their partner. That is the breach of the fundamental
right of the person. That is unfair & unjust on their behalf.
With refrenece to the articles of the constitution in INDIA they are subjected to the breach &
their rights are violated.
1. Article 14 (Right to equality)
It means Equal protection or equality before law.
2. Article 15(1) (Discrimination by State)
In this article it is said that the state cannot discriminate any person on basis of his/her
caste, race, religion, sex, birth place etc. In one of the cases, ‘National Legal Services
Authority (NALSA) v. Union of India &Ors’ , transgender got there right as a
citizen of India under which they were recognized as third gender & in the
category of social & economic backward class. If after recognizing their right
they are not getting a right to marry it is discrimination on part of state which is so
done with homosexual people.
In US one case was Bourke V. Beshear
This case involved a number of plaintiffs who though had married in different states
of the country, where same sex marriages were legal. They all later came to stay in the
state of Kentucky. In 2013, Bourke filed a suit in United States District for the
Western District of Kentucky challenging its ban on the same sex marriages and also
recognition of such marriages, even if they took place in another defendant. With time
the other same sex couples also joined the plaintiff. The court at the end concluded by
saying that “that Kentucky's denial of recognition for valid same-sex marriages
violates the United States Constitution's guarantee of equal protection under the law,
even under the most deferential standard of review. Accordingly, Kentucky's statutes
and constitutional amendment that mandate this denial are unconstitutional”.
Arguments like if the same sex has right to marry than why can’t I marry my cat or my
cousin or brother or sister, this can also indeed be my own personal choice, this also
influenced certain amount of society.
US has recognized same sex marriage & ignored all the arguments made against this but
when Dr. Manmohan Singh (Ex-president of India) once asked about the opinion on the
Canada’s decision on decriminalizing same sex marriage. The answer which came was that
‘it is not appreciated’. It’s evidence -the non-acceptance. Basically, people consider same sex
marriage as against the which was made hundreds of years ago be it moral or constitutional
& consider it against the law of land.
The solution or the steps which are taken by the US after relaizing the moral rights of the
people are like various cases were there some of that were against it some of them were in
favour of it.
The two-landmark judgment of US
United States v. Windor This is a landmark civil rights case in which the supreme
court of United States held that section 3 of the defence of marriage act, which
refused federal recognition to the same sex marriage, was in violation of the Due
Process Clause and the Fifth Amendment. The facts of the case are that -
A same sex couple resided in New York, where their marriage was also recognized.
One of the partners in 2009 died leaving behind her entire estate to Windsor, who
later when tried to claim the federal estate tax exemption for surviving spouses was
barred to do so under section 3 of DOMA. With an aim to seek refund, she sued the
Federal Government in the U.S District Court for The Southern District of New York,
to declare sec 3 of the Act as unconstitutional. The same was defended by the
Bipartisan Legal Advisory Group (BLAG). The district judge ruled that the said
section was unconstitutional. The same was also affirmed by the U.S Court of
Appeals for the Second Circuit. The US Supreme Court in the majority opinion
declared the section “as a deprivation of the liberty of the person protected by the
Fifth Amendment.”

The other case decrimilizes the same sex marriage: Obergefell V. Hodges
This was a landmark civil rights case in which 2 males decided to marry and obtain a
legal recognition of their marriage. Their marriage took place in Maryland, but their
residence state Ohio refused to recognise their marriage. Due to same, the plaintiff
 filed a case in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio.
During the proceedings, the plaintiff’s partner died due to terminal illness. After
which the district judge temporarily restrained the registrar from accepting any death
certificate. The rulings were made in the favour of the plaintiffs. After which a series
of appeals were filed and finally the case went to the US Supreme Court. The ruling
were in affirmation after which ban on same sex marriage from all over the country
was removed.
These are the steps taken to overcome the challenges but there are still various
countries who are suffering the dilemma of recognizing or not to recognize. Hence
this is the step taken by the most powerful country & the same steps are noe followed
by the various other countries.

QUESTION 5
John Rawls theory of justice came in 1971.
According to him the first priority any one should have should be the society. One should
always look to the society well fare specially the weaker section.
To start with his point of view he has ellobrated the the meaning of JUSTICE according to
his point of view.
JUSTICE means the ‘just’ solution of anything which is the fair alternative of the situation
given. He has given the two principles:
1. Equal Liberty
2. Difference Principle

To elaborate his principal, he had made certain assumptions & some definition:
1. Initial Position: This means that the person doing the justice should belive himself
in the initial position where he does not know anything: his race, caste, position,
culture etc.
This will help him in giving unbiased decision.
2. The veil of ignorance:
This means that the person has the power to justice but when the person does not
know his position. He won’t misuse the power of his position.
for example: If the person has given the right to give reservation then if he is in
his initial position, he cannot be baised & give decision as if he favors the upper
caste & what if the person given the position in lower caste.
This way he can make fair decision which will benifit all the sections of society.
These are the main thing which he had taken into the mind. Here the first principle ellobrates
the right to equal liberty which means he supported that the justice should be given by the
society person itself but in initial position. Which means that the person should not take his
favoured situation. Society should be considered & the justice should be given by the society
in respect to equality.
The distributive approach he has taken is to benefit the society. The difference principle here
refers to the fair & equal opportunity to all in this

The example could be taken: Imagine a person is given the work of making the hotel & he
was told that he will also get the room in that hotel permanently. Here, the principle of rawls
can be understood as the person now does not know that which room he will be getting so
now he will make every room best.
Here with himself the other group of persons who will stay there will also be benifited. Same
in case of the rawls theory he belives that the justice should also benefit the other groups of
the society.
He also blends the procedural & distributive justice. As the equality is promoted & fairness is
promoted.
At the present time if we see the justice theory can be of great use. As now a days the
political parties are enjoying the great power & making the decision according. If at present
the other context if we see there was boom earlier in regards to the Drugs. Various celebrities
were caught for that. But there was no as strict action was taken for them.
They were rather just caught or given some money & if the person of not so renowned family
comes in this case he will be caught & will be punished.
So here now also the person or the weaker section of the society is facing the problem & the
theory should be use to promote the fairness in the society.

QUESTION 6.
Nozick is the person who has given the entitlement theory in his words he said that the person
should get the thing which he deserves & now nothing can be changed as earlier the
distribution was fair only.
For example: Earlier when the resources were distributed they were distributed on the fair
basis & by the development & because of the personal skills the person could got more
benefit, And society should not interfare in between there development.
1. Nozick critics Rawls theory by stating that the term distribution does not mean being
equal or unequal. Where Rawls states that the distribution can be equal or unequal or
in case of the person who has worked the hardest will get the maximum. Nozick states
that it all depends upon the nature of such distribution. This means that it should be a
legitimate one or there is a voluntary transfer of the ownership. Another mean can be
by way of rectification. This means that in case there has been any kind of past wrong
doing or injustice, such transfer can rectify the wrongs.
2. According to Rawls theory there is an application of the concept called as the “veil of
ignorance”. This concept means that one should imagine themselves to be behind a
 veil and that you have no knowledge about yourself, your natural abilities and about
your standing in the society. From behind this veil all the members of the society are
free, rational and moral beings. He further states that the there can be an unequal
distribution of wealth only in cases where the members at the bottom of the society
ladder will be better off as compared to what they were before such distribution.
It was totally opposite to the rawls theory as he promoted the society & fought for the society
benefits & right & Nozick took & critized his theory on ground of person’s own
achievements.
Hence he critized that society is just be there the government shpuld not make any hinderance
in person’s achievement.