What is Administration of Justice?

Administration means management and justice means doing what is fair and right. When we
talk about the administration of justice, we are talking about how a government keeps things
fair and right within its borders by using its power to enforce the rules. To make sure justice
is done, a government needs to have the power to use force when necessary. There are two
important things every government must do.
 Protect the country from enemies and
 Keep things fair and right within its borders.
According to Salmond, a government is a group of people living in a specific area who are
organised to keep order and fairness by using force when needed. Governments make and
enforce laws to maintain peace and keep society safe. If a government can’t do this, it can’t
really be called a government. The main job of the administration of justice is to protect
people’s rights, make sure laws are followed and punish those who break the law.
Administration of justice refers to the system and processes through which laws are enforced
and disputes are resolved within a society. It encompasses the application of legal principles,
the investigation of alleged violations and the imposition of sanctions or remedies when
individuals or entities breach established rules and rights.

The administration of justice can be defined in three key points:

 A Politically Organised Society: This means that there is a structured government or
society in place to oversee and manage how things are done. It’s not a free-for-all;
there are rules and order.
 The Use of Government Force: The government has the authority and power to use
physical force when necessary to maintain order and ensure that people follow the
rules and laws.
 The Goal of Upholding Rights: The primary aim is to ensure that everyone’s rights
are protected and respected. It’s about making sure that people are treated fairly and
justly within the society.

Purpose of Administration of Justice:

The purpose of administration of Justice is to punish the wrongdoer. He is punished by the
state. The question arises, what is the purpose of punishment or in other words, what is the
end of criminal justice system. From very purpose of punishment. Those theories have been
given concerning the purpose of punishment. Those theories may be broadly divided into two
classes. The view of one class of theories is that the end of criminal justice is to protect and
end to the welfare of the state and society. The view of the class of theories is that the
purpose of punishment is retribution. The offender must be made to suffer for the wrong
committed by him
The primary objectives of the administration of justice are to maintain order, protect
individual rights, ensure fairness and uphold the rule of law.
This multifaceted concept includes both criminal and civil justice systems, with the former
focusing on the punishment of offenders and the latter on providing remedies and
compensation to those who have suffered harm. A well-functioning administration of justice
is essential for promoting social harmony and resolving conflicts within a community.

Origin and Growth of the Administration of Justice:

It is human nature to want to live together in a community. We are social beings, and this
social nature compels us to be part of a society. However, when people live together, their
different interests can sometimes lead to conflicts, which is why we need a system for
administering justice. In the early days, people would turn to their elders to settle disputes
among them.
This marked the beginning of the development of human societies, progressing from simple,
natural communities to more complex and civilized ones. This progression is considered the
historical foundation for the evolution of systems to administer justice.
As the need for a formal system of justice became evident, the concept of the State was born.
In the beginning, these early forms of the State didn’t have the strength to effectively control
crime and punish wrongdoers. However, today, we have Magistrates and Judges who are
responsible for carrying out this essential function.
According to Hobbes, he believed that a common power, in the form of a government or
authority, is necessary to keep people in check within a community. He argued that without
this common power, individuals would be unrestrained, and chaos could prevail. In his
words, unless people are under “a common power to keep them all in awe,” society will
struggle to maintain order.

Advantages of Administration of Justice

1. Advantages of Administration of Justice
 Uniformity and Consistency in Law
The administration of justice ensures that laws are applied consistently and uniformly. This
helps in the systematic development of the legal system, making it fair and predictable.
 Collective Wisdom
The rules of law are a reflection of the collective wisdom of the community. Following these
rules reduces the chances of making wrong decisions. As Sir Edward Coke noted, the wisdom
of the law surpasses any individual’s wisdom and justice represents the wisdom of the entire
community.
 Consistent Application
With fixed rules in place, judges can apply the law consistently, ensuring that similar cases
are treated similarly.
 Regulation of Conduct
When citizens know the law, they can regulate their behaviour accordingly. This promotes a
law-abiding society where people understand the boundaries and consequences of their
actions.
2. Disadvantages of Administration of Justice
 Rigidity
Legal justice can be inflexible. Societal changes often occur more rapidly than changes in
legal systems, leading to situations where the law may not adequately address new
challenges.
 Technicalities and Formalities
Legal justice can be filled with technical jargon and formal procedures, making it complex
and difficult for ordinary citizens to navigate without legal assistance.
 Complexity
Society is intricate and dynamic, requiring complex laws to address its evolving needs. This
complexity can sometimes lead to confusion and difficulties in interpretation and
enforcement.
 Unintended Consequences
While the law serves as a remedy for many problems, it can also have unintended negative
consequences, as noted by Salmond. Sometimes, the legal system itself can create new issues
or injustices.

PUBLIC JUSTICE
Public justice is that which administered by the state through its own tribunals. Private justice
is distinguished as being justice between individuals. Public justice is a relation between the
courts on the one hand and individuals on the other.
Private justice is a relation between individuals. Private justice is the end for which the courts
fulfil that end. Private persons are not allowed to take the law into hands. Even if a wrong has
been done to them, they must, refrain from helping themselves. There is no place for force in
private justice. That can be used only in the case of public justice that carries the sword and
the scales and not private justice.

JUSTICE ACCORDING TO LAW:

In modern times, what is given by the courts to the people is not what can really be called
justice but merely justice according to law. Judges are not legislators, and it is not their duty
to correct the defective provisions of law. Their only function is to administer the law of the
country. They are not expected to ignore the law of the country. It is rightly said that “in the
modern slate, the administration of justice according to law is commonly taken to imply
recognition of fixed rules.

Types of Administration of Justice

1. Criminal Administration of Justice
The administration of criminal justice deals with public wrongs, which are offences outlined
in the Pakistan Penal Code (PPC). Its primary aim is to punish offenders. Punishment, in this
context, refers to the imposition of consequences, typically considered undesirable (e.g.,
imprisonment or death penalty), by the state authority upon individuals found legally guilty
of committing a crime.
The primary objectives of criminal justice are to punish wrongdoers (offenders) and maintain
law and order in society. The state is responsible for punishing criminals. Punishment serves
various purposes, including deterring individuals from repeating crimes, expressing society’s
disapproval of antisocial behaviour and seeking to reform and rehabilitate offenders while
protecting society from criminal activity.
2. Civil Administration of Justice
Civil justice administration aims to provide relief, often in the form of compensation or other
remedies, to the injured party. It deals with the enforcement of two types of rights:
primary rights and sanctioning rights.
 Primary rights are those inherent rights that exist independently and do not stem from
any wrongdoing. Primary rights can be enforced through specific performance while
sanctioning rights are enforced through sanctioning enforcement proceedings.
 Sanctioning rights emerge as a result of the violation of primary rights. When a
primary right is infringed upon, a sanctioning right comes into play. For instance, if a
valid contract (a primary right) is breached, the right to claim damages for the losses
suffered due to the breach becomes a sanctioning right.

THEORIES OF PUNISHMENT:
Punishment can be defined as infliction of a certain kind of pain or loss to someone who has
committed a wrong or misdeed. It denotes an act to make someone suffer in some way
because he has done something wrong. Punishment must be imposed by an authority, that is
the person or human agency that controls the behaviour of the alleged wrongdoer. The main
objective of punishment is to do justice to the victim, and to prevent crime by penalising the
criminal. It is a mechanism to preserve peace, harmony and social order in society by causing
pain to a criminal through a legal procedure.

1. DETERRENT THEORY:
Deterrent theory revolves around the idea that the main purpose of the punishment is to deter
or discourage people from committing similar future crimes. Its aim is to project punishment
as an example to other potential criminals so that they would not commit the same offence.

2. REFORMATIVE THEORY:
Under the reformative theory, the offender is provided with such forms of punishment which
would reform him and prevent him from committing such crime. The offender is punished in
a reformative manner rather than inflicting a painful punishment. The basic objective of this
punishment is that by reforming an offender, he self-realises his act of crime and thereby the
repetition of such crime is prevented. The punishment should serve as a means of social
education.

3. RETRIBUTIVE THEORY:
Retributive theory is a theory of punishment in which when an offender breaks the law,
justice requires that they suffer in return and that the response to a crime is proportional to the
offence. “An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth” is the maxim on which primitive society
proceeds. Victims were to be compensated for the intentional and unintentional harms they
suffered, and offenders were to be punished because they had done wrong.

4. REVENGE vs RETRIBUTIVE THEORY:

It is important to separate these two notions of revenge and retribution. Revenge is
associated with personal satisfaction, with getting one’s own back for what has been done to
oneself or one’s family or friends. Retribution on the other hand, is a matter of what someone
deserves, irrespective of giving satisfaction or of whether anyone is going to benefit.
Justification in terms of revenge is unsatisfactory because it smacks of vindictiveness and
thus conflicts with ideals such as those of unforgiveness and mercy. Retributive on the other
hand, is the opposite-the interests of the criminal are being sacrificed.

5. COMPENSATORY THEORY:
According to this theory, the object of punishment must be not merely to prevent further
crimes but also to compensate the victim of the crime.

KINDS OF PUNISHMENTS
1. Capital punishment:
In the history of punishment, capital punishment has always occupied a very important place.
In ancient times and even in the Middle Ages, sentencing of offenders to death was a very
common kind of punishment. Even for what might be considered as minor offences in
modern times, death penalty was imposed. In the reign of George III, there were as many as
200 capital offences. death is the severe nature of punishment which was opposed by
different social, lawmakers, and people all over the world. After certain amendments the
Death Punishments are awarded in cases like murder, mutiny, criminal conspiracy and some
serious offences.

2. Deportation:
Another way of punishment is the deportation of incorrigible or dangerous offenders. This
method used to be called transportation. However, this is not a solution to the problem. If a
person is dangerous in one society and if he is left loose in another society, and he is likely to
be equally dangerous there also.

3. Corporal punishment:
Another form of punishment is corporal punishment. This punishment includes modulation,
flogging (or whipping) and torture. It was also a very severe form of punishment. Many
persons died as result of the wounds received by them on account of flogging or whipping.
The main object of this kind of punishment is deterrence.

4. Imprisonment:
Another form of punishment is imprisonment. If properly administered, imprisonment can
severe all the three objectives of punishment. It may be deterrent because it makes an
example of the offender to other. It may be preventive because it disables the offender, at
least for some time, from repeating the offence. If properly used, it might give opportunities
for reforming the character of the accused.

5. Solitary confinement:
Another kind of punishment is solitary confinement which is an aggravated kind of
punishment. Solitary confinement exploits fully the sociable nature of man. By denting him
the society of his fellow beings, it seeks to inflict pain on him.

CONCLUSION
A just society is one where the administration of justice is not only robust but also reflective
of the core values of its people. It stands as a testament to a society’s commitment to
upholding the principles of fairness and equality, ensuring that the rights and dignity of every
individual are safeguarded.