Theory of Justice Analysis

0 Comment

Theory of Justice Analysis There are several principles of justice theories and some of them shall be discussed in this section. However, these principles of justice theories differ from traditional utilitarianism in some ways and the contrast between them shall also be highlighted and explained. It is also pertinent to note that, justice can be explained by the modern Criminal Justice System (CJS) and other entities involved in the criminal justice system and these salient facts shall also be explained in this paper. Justice as defined by the modern CJS also differs from security in some ways. One of the fundamental principles of justice theories is the one propounded by John Rawls. Rawls’ principle of justice theory is meant to embody the ethical foundation of political government (Rawls, 1971). In what he called, A Theory of Justice, Rawls was of the opinion that humans are in dire need of freedom and liberty in order to fulfill their heart desires and pursue their interests as long as it is not done in any way to harm other people (Rawls, 1971). Thus, Rawls’ principle of justice theory is based on the premise that every citizen should be given the opportunity to succeed like every other citizen. This principle of justice as propounded by John Rawls could be likened to the principle of equality as every individual must be given equal opportunity to succeed like other citizens of the society. Another principle of justice theory also laid emphasis on the fact that every individual in the society have the right to vote and be voted for into any political office. Any economic and social inequalities should be equally accessible to any position and ought to offer the maximum advantage to people that have the smallest amount of advantages in the society. This principle was actually propounded by Rawls and could also be referred to as the difference principle. This principle of justice theory clearly stipulates that, no advantage can exist morally, if it is not beneficial to the people that are highly advantageous in the society (Rawls, 1971). These principles of justice theory are different from traditional utilitarianism due to the fact that they only talked about the concept of justice and fairness and nothing else. Unlike the traditional utilitarianism that discusses other issues like property rights and other issues that are not really related to justice, these principles were only concerned with the issue of justice and this is what separates them from traditional utilitarianism. These principles of justice also differs from traditional utilitarianism due to the fact that it is against the individualistic nature of utilitarianism as it can be seen that traditional utilitarianism was a threat to the right of individuals in the society (Barry, 1989). It was on the basis of this, that these principles of justice theory can be used as a tool to see the society as a social contract that every individual must be committed to (Barry, 1989). Though the purposes of the modern criminal justice system are in line with the purposes of security, which are to control the rate of crime in the society, avert crime and to give and maintain justice in the society, the fact remains that the modern CJS differs from security in some ways. When it comes to the issue of providing and maintaining justice, it is a very complicated one and this is due to the fact that justice is a very difficult concept to define. This is due to the fact that, it is not easy to arrive at a universal definition of justice as justice must be fair to all. But, justice can actually be defined by the modern criminal justice agencies and other entities involved as a system that treats all citizens as equals before the law and these individuals are free from any subjective arrest as described by the law. The onus now lies on the shoulders of the courts, corrections and the law enforcement to determine what is really fair. Justice as defined by the modern criminal justice system differs from security in the sense that, while justice gives individual the liberty that is due to them by law, security could take these liberty from the individual all in the name of protecting certain individuals or safeguarding the walls of the country. Thus, it could then be argued that while justice must be fair to all, security can never be really fair to all individuals. This can be seen in the fight against terrorism, some rights of some individuals have been taken away from them all in the name of security and fighting against terrorism. The problem with security is its inability to really balance between national security and individual liberties and this is where justice differs from it (Roemer, 1996). Thus, the analysis of some basic principles of justice theories shows that justice must be fair to all. Justice is also closely associated with equality. Through the analyzed principle of justice theories, it was seen that these principles differ from traditional utilitarianism in some ways. The definition of justice as given by the agencies of the modern criminal justice system was also broadly given and the difference between justice and security was also properly elaborated. References Barry, B. (1989) Theories of Justice, Vol. 1. Berkeley: University of California Press Rawls, J. (1971). A Theory of Justice. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press Roemer, J.E., (1996). Theories of Distributive Justice. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press