THE PHILOSOPHY OF DISTRIBUTIVE JUSTICE SYSTEM
Ashish Kumar
Distributive Justice or Economic Justice or the Fair Share principle, as the name suggests, is basically concerned with the social and economic welfare of the citizens. It says that an equal society is that where there is a fair allocation of the material goods and services between all the sections of the society. John Rawls, the main theorist of Distributive Justice gives two basic principles of Fairness or Fair Share related to Distributive Justice.
The Constitution of India, through Article 14, 15, 16, 38, 39, 39(A) enforces the principle of distributive justice. Distributive justice exists in a society where there exists no inequality, so the Indian constitution through these articles tries to remove the prevailing inequalities in the society. Under Article 38 the State shall strive to promote the welfare of the people and develop a social order empowered to bestow upon distributive justice in the form of social, economic and political justice. So, basically Distributive Justice is concerned with the welfare of the masses. There exists inequality in all spheres of life be it education, health, equality of opportunity, availability of services or any other field. Poverty is also one of the most extrinsic evidence of Inequality that is most evident in our Indian
…show more content…
Our Constitution permits and even directs the State to administer what may be termed 'distributive justice '. The concept of distributive justice in the sphere of law-making connotes, inter alia, the removal of economic inequalities and rectifying the injusticeresulting from dealings or transaction between unequals in society. Law should be used as an instruments of distributive justice to achieve a fair division of wealth among the members of society based upon the principle: 'From each according to his capacity, to each according to his
Inequitable Incarceration The months before and during WW1 in America were a dark and gloomy period for the Japanese-American citizens. Many Japanese-Americans have shared their story of the internment camps during WW1 and Jerry Stanley, a victim of the camps noted, “I am proud that I am an American citizen of Japanese ancestry, for my very background makes me appreciate more fully the wonderful advantages of this nation.” (Stanley 3). Stanley was a proud american and appreciated the freedoms he had.
The United States is a country which every day is as much as changes in their justice systems, as in the constitution in order to defend the rights of citizens and improve as a country. Is America a country completely free of injustice, discrimination and respect for the rights of citizens ?. There are two things related to the improvement and stability of the country. According to Obama's Speech he was trying to make many changes and implement new laws for equality of all people as well as a fair justice system for all citizens regardless of race. In his speech the appeal rhetorical most used was Logos, after pathos and finally ethos.
The Book Equal Justice Under Law by Constance Baker Motley, shows that not only is there inherent racism and injustice within America, but it shows that the country itself was founded on the premise that blacks are not equal to whites. Much progress was made through the civil rights movement, and Equal Justice Under Law covers some of the cases that made a big impact on society and the civil rights movement, as well as some of the struggles an African American had to face in everyday life, such as Jim Crow laws, unequal educational opportunities, and racism. Constance Motley had a very influential role in the civil rights movement. There were many circumstances in which the ruling of one of her cases directly correlated with the civil rights
The police jumped into action and treated this case with urgency. The type of injustice that this conflict displayed was distributive injustice. Distributive injustice “is concerned with the criteria that lead you to feel you received a fair outcome” (Deutsch, 2007, p. 44). I believe in most cases involving black people the news make the police out to be bad guys. The most recent cases with the killing of African American males will make you think that the police don’t care about Blacks.
Lately there has been a significant increase in attention towards restorative justice as a unique option for dealing with criminal behavior. Instead of solely fixating on punishment, restorative justice places emphasis on repairing the harm caused by crimes and rebuilding relationships among offenders, victims, and communities (Griffiths & Murdoch, 2018). The Canadian criminal justice system currently operates under retributive ideals, prioritizing punishing wrongdoers for their actions rather than prioritizing restitution and rehabilitation. In contrast to the current system, restorative justice aims to tackle the immediate consequences of crime and more importantly, its underlying causes. At its core, restorative justice tries to rectify the harm inflicted upon victims
Restorative Justice is needed for many reasons. The purpose of this paper is to tell you why it is needed. The basic goal of Restorative Justice is to hold juveniles accountable and aiding them in accepting them in responsibility for their actions by rebuilding relationships in the community. Community involvement is needed in preventing future juvenile crimes.
1. Introduction Income inequality has grown significantly during this past decades and this phenomenon continues to increase over the years. This problem is constantly discussed in the daily news all around the world. Several consequences of this increase of inequality between people leads to economic problems such as high unemployment rates, lack of work for young people, fall of demand for certain product. The gap between rich and poor is increasing, the rich are richer and the poor are poorer as a result politicians and economists try to adopt certain policies in order to reduce this gap.
Equality in America America and its people have worked hard to create a home in which everyone is treated, and feels equal. We’ve fought wars, held protests, and lost many lives in situations where we were fighting for fair treatment. After all of these sacrifices, it's safe to say that Americans have the right to love, and cherish the equality that their home presents them with, but to an extent. Equality in society, government, and basic human interactions should always be kept, and held with great importance. However, we also need to keep in mind that we are not the same people.
I believe that restorative justice could be a good idea for the United States if it is used correctly. I think that if restorative justice is used correctly, it could really benefit everyone involved: the victim, offender, family, and the community. Some of the restorative justice ways can also help victims move past what has happened to them and live a more normal life again. I think restorative justice would also benefit the United States because it can help the offender have a better life after. I think that restorative justice needs to be used correctly because if it is not done right it could actually cause more harm.
Ethical Complexity of Distribute Justice and Rationing Medicine is a practice based on moral standards applied to clinical values and judgments, also known as medical ethics. Ethical values consists of beneficence, nonmaleficence, autonomy and justice. However, these ethical principles are affected when distributive justice and rationing of health care resources are implemented “…in a world in which need is boundless but resources are not…” (Scheunemann & White, 2011, p. 1630). The historic Hippocratic Oath described the four main principles of medical practice and established a moral conduct for clinicians. Beneficence demands that health care providers develop and maintain skills and knowledge, consider individual circumstances of all patients, and strive for the patient’s benefit.
Definition and Description of Procedural Justice Procedural justice is the act involved in decision making. It incorporates the process of involving transparency and fairness in making decisions. The incorporation of justice in this process is equally essential it entails that all parties allowed to give their views before decision are made concerning a given matter. Some theories state that restorative and distributive justice might not be met but for as long as there is a fair and justice procedure, there is always the possibility of having outcomes that are equitable (Jason &Tyler, 2003).
The aim of this article is to critically consider this proposition from a number of different perspectives. It will first describe the historical evolution of Equity and its connection with the Common Law. Then, it will go through to analyse why this proposition is partially correct by talking about how Equity is now more structured due to the presence of equitable maxims. This argument will be supported using a specific maxim that led to clearer equitable rules. Relevant case law will also be used for illustrating how this maxim is being used by the
In Spheres of Justice, Michael Walzer presents a philosophical work that does not support the nature of tyranny within its justice. It therefore explores the relationship between philosophy and tyranny. For Walzer distributive justice, and the theories that subsequently enact it, should find their foundations within a shared cultural meaning and understanding rather than an abstract framework that pays no mind to the society upon which it is enacted. Walzer’s purpose within Spheres of Justice can be described from the following statement: “I want to argue… that the principles of justice are themselves pluralistic in form; that different social goods ought to be distributed for different reasons, in accordance with different procedures, by
Men make laws to instill order in a society and prevent chaos in any shape or form. Naturally, laws will always be somewhat unjust because it is impossible to consistently construct laws that directly and equally benefit all members of a society. There will always be a majority that makes the laws and a minority that has to obey the laws. Although laws are usually the standard of morality by which we live by, they must be disobeyed in certain situations. These situations are, but not limited to, an undemocratic formation of aforementioned laws, laws that are inherently unjust according to human law which can be synonymous with God’s law.
In recent years the way wealth is distributed in the United States has caused a huge drift between the upper class and the lower class. The country is becoming a banana republic in which most of the wealth is owned by the top 1%. Although the United States is a democracy I believe that in recent years, it has become a plutocracy nation. The wealth inequality plays a major role in this. If this trend between the upper class and the lower class continues it could cause many problems.