Justice is Blind
She is portrayed that way; blind. Blind, to indicate that neither fear nor favour can impinge on her neutrality, her ability to sift fact from fiction to deliberate, to weigh the pros and cons, to arrive at a balanced response. Sounds good, and most of us have grat respect for Justice, we honour her and believe in her and we call out to her and for her intervention, to give meaning and direction to our lives, to succour us, to right wrongs.But because her administration is conducted through the design of human fallacy she reaches her judgement through a web of human shortcomings. We humans require justice to be done. Justice done represents the underpinnings of democracy. Due justice is sought everywhere to validate the belief that mankind is endowed with those emotional characteristics that raise us from the muck and mire of daily struggle where in extremes of emotion we bring forth from dark hidden places inside ourselves those other emotions which we cannot control through the intellect we are endowed with as a counterbalance.
Those whom we select to represent Justice in our courts are enjoined to examine all the data available and reach a reasonable compromise representing societal justice. So who is to say that individuals whose moral imperatives have been compromised will not be placed in these positions of high moral judgemental office? We hope and pray that individuals whose sense of justice has not been impaired by personal ethical frailties or discriminatory beliefs will stand in judgement on us.
We believe in the system of justice we have in place to ensure neutrality in weighing issues of social moment, to arrive at a response reflecting even-handedness, fairness, a reflection of the law that is in place to protect society as a whole. It is then left to fallible humans to appraise, to evaluate, to study, to reach balanced and informed conclusions.
The process can only reflect the independent thoughts, the academic credentials and humanistic training of moderate-minded individuals entrusted to weigh critical facts and issues, then render judgements reflective of society's agreed values, norms and ethics. We seek human solutions to often-intractible human problems, hoping that panels comprised of suitably schooled, empathetic judges can assemble their collective wisdom to arrive at acceptable, workable solutions to vexing issues facing individuals, groups or society at large.
We say justice delayed is justice denied. But even when justice is expedited through the system there are no guarantees that justice will be done, when facts are sifted through the lens of human beings, however trusted, however creative-minded, however well meaning. Just solutions proposed by inadequae human intellectual resources are celebrated for the validation they provide that justice prevails. Then we're willing to accept the conceit that Justice has done her duty.
But there are interventions of vested interests, there is the problem of moral relativism, allegiances of religion, culture and politics corrupting the process - to sway opinions of already-compromised human decision-makers. Process can only be as successful as its human representatives' true neutrality to the issues at hand.
posted by Pieface @ Thursday, November 23, 2006
<< Home