Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Justice meaning
Distinguish between natural law and positive
Distinguish between natural law and positive
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Justice meaning
Essay on Justice
‘Justice is such an elusive concept that it hardly seems worthwhile
for a legal system to strive to achieve it’.
Justice is something that we all want from a Law and believe should be
an integral part in any legal system. However, the meaning of Justice
is very difficult to define. There are many aspects of justice that we
may question about; i.e. is a particular law just? Is the legal system
just? Much of the issue of justice is very controversial and raises
questions such as whether the combination of Law and system produce a
just result? Justice has a definition as follows: ‘The quality of
being just or fair, the act of determining rights and assigning
rewards or punishments’ Webster’s dictionary. This definition of
Justice is vague and will be discussed further.
One must take into account that the issue of justice also has other
elements drawn into it: i.e. morality and justice. This illustrates
that the law has been attributed with many objectives. These
objectives are culminated from theoretical perspectives such as
Positivism v Natural Law, Utilitarianism, Marx and Rawls. Other
objectives associated with the Law and Weber, Durkheim, Llewellyn and
Devlin debate justice. These theorists bring greater depth of
explaining the significance of the objectives of Law in the English
legal system, and also emphasises on how justice is expressed. For
example, justice can be inherently linked to moral obligations in
which the theorist Devlin lays down this view. We can further discuss
the significance of the objectives; the theory of Natural Law. It is
based on the idea that there is a divine source of Law, wh...
... middle of paper ...
.... The Discrimination Law could also prove to be
a problem as it only protects certain categories. For example, other
religions apart from Christianity are not approved within the Legal
system.
Although the Law seems to adopt some positivist aspects such as
parliamentary sovereignty and separation of powers, we should look up
to the legal system in a optimistic way as justice is clearly an
aspiration of the Law as evidenced by the symbol of the ‘weighing
scales’. It is also evident that the Law is adhering to the natural
law as the European Convention of Human Rights have been implemented
so this shows that there is a shift from strands of positivism to
principles of the natural law. This helps society to enforce their
views as a whole and also helps elevate justice as one of the
principle object of practical Law.
The death penalty, as administered by states based on their individual laws, is considered capital punishment, the purpose of which is to penalize criminals convicted of murder or other heinous crimes (Fabian). The death penalty issue has been the focus of much controversy in recent years, even though capital punishment has been a part of our country's history since the beginning. Crimes in colonial times, such as murder and theft of livestock were dealt with swiftly and decisively ("The Death Penalty..."). Criminals were hanged shortly after their trial, in public executions. This practice was then considered just punishment for those crimes. Recently though, the focus of the death penalty debate has been on moral and legal issues. The murderers of today's society can be assured of a much longer life even after conviction, with the constraints of the appeals process slowing the implementation of their death sentence. In most cases, the appeal process lasts several years, during which time criminals enjoy comfortable lives. They have television, gym facilities, and the leisure time to attend free college-level classes that most American citizens must struggle to afford. Foremost, these murderers have the luxury of time, something their victims ran out of the moment their paths crossed. It is time this country realized the only true justice for these criminals is in the form of the death penalty. The death penalty should be administered for particularly heinous crimes.
Not only has there been debates about what approach should be used when punishing juvenile offenders, but there has also been debates about the need for two separate justice systems. Some individuals believe that juveniles need to be punished for their delinquency by being sentenced to jail just as an adult offender would be. According to Urban, Cyr, and Decker (2003), The Violent Crime Control Act of 1995 allows juveniles who are 13 years old and up to be sentenced as an adult if they have committed a violent crime with a fire arm on federal property. Advocates of such acts believe the juvenile justice system has failed at “rehabilitating” offenders by placing more focus on rehabilitation and treatment practices. Because of this these advocates
In correlating the scores from the Self-Assessment Exercise located on pages 58-59 of our text book I have discovered that the fairness for which I score my place of work, and the organization for which I work, the highest is in fact Interpersonal Justice; for which my combines score totaled 13 out of a possible 15. This places Interpersonal justice at a very high overall level of perceived justice for me. And I can think of many reason ranging from the broad to the personal, and from the historic to the current, which all could be contributors to my having this perception.
In a truly just society, justice would lead to a heightening of the vulnerable patients making their health perhaps the only position of their life that is no longer vulnerable. Until social justice is applied to our geopolitical stage, gender and ethnicity differences will continue to limit work opportunities and fair pay. But, if we were to get the health component right, their health would not be a compounding factor in their vulnerability. Instead, good health can help to establish one’s capabilities to explore opportunities and better their lives. Whether it is Nussbaum’s (2000) exhaustive list of 10 essential capabilities or liberalism’s primary good (Almgren, 2013, p. 35), good health and well-being enables a person to fulfill their
In the synthesis paper, “The Price of Justice” by Jenna Haack there are numerous flaws and wrongdoings, including but not limited to weak topic sentences, quotes that are poorly embedded and cited, and failing to effectively communicate and analyze the arguments that are portrayed in the film Dead Man Walking directed by Tim Robbins.
Capital Punishment: Justice in Retribution? The American government operates in the fashion of an indirect democracy. Citizens live under a social contract whereby individuals agree to forfeit certain rights for the good of the whole. Punishments for crimes against the state are carried out via due process, guaranteed by the Fourteenth Amendment.
ABSTRACT: Both utilitarians and the deontologists are of the opinion that punishment is justifiable, but according to the utilitarian moral thinkers, punishment can be justified solely by its consequences, while the deontologists believe that punishment is justifiable purely on retributive ground. D. D. Raphael is found to reconcile both views. According to him, a punishment is justified when it is both useful and deserved. Maclagan, on the other hand, denies it to be justifiable in the sense that it is not right to punish an offender. I claim that punishment is not justifiable but not in the sense in which it is claimed by Maclagan. The aim of this paper is to prove the absurdity of the enquiry as to whether punishment can be justified. Difference results from differing interpretations of the term 'justification.' In its traditional meaning, justification can hardly be distinguished from evaluation. In this sense, to justify an act is to say that it is good or right. I differ from the traditional use and insist that no act or conduct can be justified. Infliction of punishment is a human conduct and as such it is absurd to ask for its justification. I hold the view that to justify is to give reason, and it is only a statement or an assertion behind which we can put forth reason. Infliction of pain is an act behind which the agent may have purpose or intention but not reason. So, it is not punishment, but rather statements concerning punishment that we can justify.
‘Law as integrity’ embraces a vision for judges which states that as far as possible judges should identify legal rights and duties assuming that they are created by the public as an entity, and that they express the public’s perception of justice and fairness. This requires Dworkin’s ideal of Hercules, a judge of ‘superhuman skill, learning, patience and acumen’, to ask whether his interpretation of law could form a part of a coherent theory justifying the whole legal system. Law as integrity stipulates that the law must express one voice. Judges must accept that the law is based around coherent principles about justice, fairness and procedural due process, in all new cases which comes before them in order to treat everybody equally.
Parliament, the supreme law-making body, has an unrestricted legislative power, and the laws it passes cannot be set aside by the courts. The role of judges, in relation to laws enacted by Parliament, is to interpret and apply them, rather than to pass judgment on whether they are good or bad laws. However, evidence has shown that they have a tendency to deviate from their ‘real roles’ and instead formulate laws on their own terms. Thus the real role of a judge in any legal system continues to be a phenomenon questioned by many. We must consider whether they are “authoritarian law-makers, or if their profession makes them mere declarers of the law” . In this essay, I will argue the ways that judges do make law as well as discussing the contrary.
By the end of Dostoyesky’s Crime and Punishment, the reader is no longer under the illusion of the possible existence of “extraordinary” men. For an open-minded reader, and even perhaps the closed-minded ones too, the book is a journey through Raskolnikov’s proposed theory on crime. It is a theory based on the ideas that had “been printed and read a thousand times”(313) by both Hegel and Nietzsche. Hegel, a German philosopher, influenced Dostoyesky with his utilitarian emphasis on the ends rather than the means whereby a superman existed as one that stood above the ordinary man, but worked for the benefit of all mankind. Nietsche’s more selfish philosophy focused on the rights to power which allowed one to act in a Hegelian manner. In committing his crime, Raskolnikov experienced the ultimate punishment as he realized that his existence was not that of the “extraordinary” man presented in his theory. In chapter five of part three in Crime and Punishment, this theory is outlined by its creator, Raskolnikov. Such an innovative theory would clearly have placed him in the “extraordinary” category, but when he fails to meet its standards, by submitting to the common law through his confession, the theory crumbles right before the reader’s eyes.
Discrimination is all over the world and it's is a very serious problem in society. We judge each other daily because of their gender, ethnicity, religion, age, and the way a person behaves. Discrimination is the “unequal treatment provided to one or more parties based on a mutual accord or some other logical or illogical reason” (merriam-webster). In the modern world of the United State of America the topic of discrimination in the Justice system is debatable because there is considerable evidence confirming both individual and systemic biases. The United States has an extended history of discrimination in several aspects of life, including employment, public accommodations and education. Nowadays there are extremely biased individuals and
A period of change from one state to another, transition, it’s never easy. In the book Crime and Punishment, by Fyodor Dostoevsky, the characters lives take place during a time of struggle. People make desperate decisions in time of struggle, making poor decisions cause characters to appear bad but upon closer inspection, goodness can be found. In the short story Young Goodman Brown, Nathaniel Hawthorne tells the tale of man that constantly faces an inner battle between good and evil. In both stories we see the conflict of good vs. evil within the characters that lead them to making their final transformations that evidently lead to their sanity or their demise.
Firstly in this report, I will be giving the different definitions of rule of law by different philosophers; secondly, I will be applying the rule of law to the English Legal system and thirdly I will be explaining separation of powers with a focus on the impartial judiciary. Finally, I will be using cases to support every detailed point given.
Should the aim of law be primarily focused on the protection of individual liberty or, instead, the normative goals aimed at the good of the society? The question of law and morality is difficult mainly because it needs to be addressed with current social conditions that exist, the morals and values that the particular society has. In general, the laws in any society should not only be focused on regulations, but it should also protect individual’s liberty. Devlin debate was based on deciding whether law should enforce morality. He debated about what the law ought to be and whether morality should be enforced by law to form a good society. Furthermore, John Stewart Mill did not write specifically on law and morality. His argument constituted mainly on the anti-enforcers side of law and morality because he believed in individual liberty. John Stuart Mill's assertion that the only justification for limiting one person's liberty is to prevent harm to another
The relationship between law and morality has been argued over by legal theorists for centuries. The debate is constantly be readdressed with new cases raising important moral and legal questions. This essay will explain the nature of law and morality and how they are linked.