JUSTICE Meaning Development of the meaning of Justice Dimensions of justice / Types of Justice Contemporary theories of Justice Points to Remember The concept of justice is closely related to the concepts of liberty and equality. In everyday Hej ise at ana oo Be ffwe think closely we shall realise that all laws are not always just. So for numerous people it has a different connotation. For a man of law justice means the judgement pronounced by a judge, for man of religion, justice means a set of morals and values to be followed, for a poor man, justice means abolition of poverty. The list is endless. What it means is, justice depends on our view of society and our type of society. Meaning The yordjustice is derived fom thé ERROR URES (bi (OHS) a bonding or joining idea, justice serves to organise people together into a right or order of relationship by distributing to each person his or her due share of rights and duties, reward and punishments. Development of the meaning of Justice It is difficult to provide a precise meaning or definition to the term ‘justice’. Yet all through the history of mankind the notion of justice has prevailed and in fact some kind of justice administered to the people.The earliest conception of justice is found in the writings of Pythagoreans in Greece. Justice was equated with harmony of proportion. A state is just ifit is composed of equal parts. The idea was accepted by Plato. Platonic conception of justice is ethical rather than legal. Each individual in his ideal state has a mora! obligation to perform the function and fill the station of life for which he is by nature best suited. Thus justice is doing one’s duty and not to meddle with the sphere of others. Aristotle spoke of two types of justice ‘distributive’ and ‘corrective’. ‘Distributive justice’ assigns each person his due in shape of a share of wealth, honour, public office in proportion to his contribution to the society. A more worthy and virtuous person will have the greater power and greater share of the social resources and rewards. Corrective justice refers to the redress provided to a person fora wrong done to him. It provides relief to an affected person. It provides safeguard against the arbitrary and wrong actions of other individuals and groups. The conformity of positive law to the higher law was considered as a part of perfect justice by Roman lawyers. St Augustine linked the idea of justice with religion and divinity. Justice consisted in the right relationship between man and God. David Hume rejected the conception of natural justice and rights and replaced it by the principle of utility. Bentham maintained the principle of ‘greatest happiness, of the greatest number’ as the measure of right and wrong. In the 19th century, Marxists viewed the concept of justice in terms of the ‘economic system’ and ‘made of production’ of society. Marx and Engels in their analysis of economic relation allowed no place for justice. For them, it was a work for the exploitation of the working class by the capitalists. Justice would be available to the working class with the end of capitalist mode of production. Thus we find that the concept of justice has not been static. It has been changing with the change of time and circumstances. Two meanings of justice which emerged from the above account are, one broad and other narrow. The broad meaning of | "justice is associated with the social system as a whole and is understood as righteousness and virtue. Justice is infallible and unchangeable. The narrow meaning of justice is associated with the legal system and legal proccss in the society. It is concerned with the protection and maintenance of rights and obligations of individuals, groups and public authorities by a legitimate legal process and an independent and impartial judicial system. It is primarily identified with the legal aspect of justice. Dimensions of justice / Types of Justice There are four important dimensions/types of justice - legal, political, social and economic.(1) Legal Justice : Justice, realised through the legal and judicial system is known as legal justice. It has two broad elements: (1) Laws should be reasonable, fair and proper. (2) Every individual should get justice according to the rule of law as opposed to the arbitrary will of men. Laws should be reasonable and fair. They should be equal for all and not be discriminatory#This implies equality before law. A democratically constituted legislature is likely to make rational and just laws{jl-cgal justice also ensures that everyone should be able to obtain impartial justice from the judicial systemigit means that everyone is entitled to equal protection of laws, To realise this, the court of law should be independent and impartial in interpreting laws to deliver justice. In fact the independence of judiciary is now an universally accepted principle of modem justice. (@ke judiciary is regarded as the watch dog of the constitution and protector of the rights of the peopled) (2) Political Justice : The essence of the political dimension of justice is ithin the statefilt means equal participation of all in the affairs and power structure of the stat ile the legal dimension of justice in concerned with the formal rules, th The roots of political justice relate to the relationship between the individual and the authority i.e the state. Political uality means that all citizens have the same «political rights, equal oie in governments and equal accesso allofficcs of author provided the necessary qualifications are fulfilled. As a matter of fact through political However, political justice does not mean absolute political equality. That is neither possible nor desirable. Enjoyment of political rights is subject to certain conditions. For instance minimum age for the right to vote, or contest in the election cannot be called discriminatory. Above all, itis the ‘political will’ of the ruling class which can ensure the enjoyment of political justice. (3) Social Justice : Social justice means social equality. Positively it means availability of 1S EERE ol for the development of personality; it implies giving every one his due in society. Negatively it means absence of any discrimination on grounds of caste, colour, creed, race, class or sex. There exists no unnecessary social restraint which retards the growth of an individual and the realisation of a good and happy life. The policy of racial discrimination followed in south Africa is a negation of the principle of social equality or social justice. Socialjustice aims at removing exploitation, oppression and discrimination in society. It stands for special protection of the weaker sections in the society. Social justice has been accepted as the guiding principle of welfare states. In India the basic elements of social justice have been incorporated in certain Fundamental rights and Directive principles of state policy of the Constitution. prohibits discrimination on grounds of religion, race, caste, sex or place of birth. But the state can make special provision for women, children and people of backward classes. Art 16 provides for equality of opportunity in matters of public employment@Aitil7 deals with abolition of untouchability. Art 23 prohibits traffic in human beings and forced labour. Under the Directive Principles of state policy, Art 38 enjoins upon the state to secure a social order for the promotion of welfare of the people. Art 42 provides for just and human conditions of work and maternity relief{Ait46,also deals with the protection of weaker sections of the people from all forms of exploitation. However, social justice cannot be forced upon the people by the Constitution and the laws of the state. The need is the cultivation of sentiment of equality and a change of our social habits and social institutions. (4) Economic Justice : Justas the idea of social justice is the offshoot of social equality, economic justice cannot exist without economic cqualityBeonomicequality ny society which allows som cnies economic justice. If we want a socicty of social equals, we can hope to build it only on a foundation of economic justice. The state should therefore guarantec to all citizens access to the means of satisfying their primary economic needs. Economic justice has been looked at from two different points of view-The Liberals and Marxists. The liberals consider the state as an agency to provide socio- economic justice and they believe the ends of economic justice would be met if the state could fulfil the economic needs of the people, disparities of income are reduced in society, and equal opportunity is provided to all. On the other hand, the Marxists believe that a just socio-economic order could be established only when all modes of exploitation over working class is ended after a successful revolution. A society divided into rich and poor; haves and have-nots is incapable of providing economic justice to the people. A real economic justice can be realised in a classless Communist society. While it cannot be denied that socio-economic justice is a panacea for our political and social ills, it has not been attained in any socicty.Contemporary theories of Justice The notion of justice has developed over the ages. It has evolved in its nature from Plato’s ethical to Aristotle's distributive justice, then it moved to religious, utilitarian to socialist and finally to the liberitarians. F.A. Hayek (The Constitution of Liberty 1960) J. Rawls (A Theory of Justice, 1972) Robert Nozick (Anarchy, State and Utopia, 1974). For F.A, Hayek, justice seeks to attain individual good rather than the social good. According to him, justice is freedom, all freedom for the individual, all that he/ she wants to obtain for his/her good. His theory of justice is procedural justice. Justice must be sought in a rule of law, treating individuals equally. John Rawls’ Justice : His interest in the liberal state and in the concept of justice has led him to formulate and reformulate his theory of justice for about four decades. In his book of 1970s, ‘Justice’ for Rawls is fairness and today his concept of justice deals with (i) The maximisation of liberty subject to such constraints as is essential for protection of liberty. ii) Equality for all both in the basic liberties of social life and also in the distribution of all forms of social goods, subject to the greatest possible benefit for those least well off in a given scheme of inequality. Gi) Fair equality of opportunity and elimination of all inequalities of opportunity based on birth and wealth. Nozick’s theory of Justice : It Stands opposite to that of Rawls; where as in Rawls theory, justice is seen as a particular pattern of social arrangement, Nozick does not believe in this. He believes individuals have rights and these rights be respected at all costs and in all circumstances. He views, rights are so fundamental for justice and any constraints upon others actions is wrong, One can justify a minimal state which means minimum laws and maximum liberties and rights of individuals. Thus there can be no uniform or universally acceptable definition of justice. Our understanding of justice would depend on our understanding of the world around us.