Concept of Justice in Political Science

The word justice is derived from the Latin words “Jungere” (to bind, to tie together) and “Jus” (a bond/tie).

As a bonding or joining idea, justice serves to organise people together into a right or fair order of relationships by distributing to each person his/her due share of rights and duties, rewards and punishments.

Justice means the quality of being right or just, or reasonable. It is opposed to what is unjust or wrong, or unreasonable. The earliest concept of Justice in Greek thought is to be found in the writings of Pythagoras.

Dimensions:

Justice can be classified into following dimensions: -

1. Legal Justice –

It is related to the process of law-making and the judicial system of society. It demands that law should be reasonable and everyone should get justice according to law. Law is not only to be reasonable but equal for all. Distinctions can be made on a rational basis. The law making institutions should also be just and rational. There should be equal protection of laws. Legal justice demands that every individual should be able to have impartial justice under the existing judicial system.

2. Political Justice –

Refers to the orientation of political institutions, political processes, and political rights according to the current conceptions of justice. This means the establishment of democratic institutions in the political life of the community. The legislators are to be constituted on the principle of Universal Adult Franchise. The independence of the judiciary is to be maintained. This involves the rule of law which means that the government should not be arbitrary and should act according to the law. Political Justice implies a full guarantee of the liberty of thought and expression, the right to criticise the government and its policies. The essence of political justice is political equality in the state.

3. Social Justice –

There is social justice in a community if there are means available for equal social opportunities for the development of personality by all the people. No one should be deprived of those social conditions which are essential for their development. Social Justice is the offspring of Political Justice. A politically unjust society can never be socially just. In common parlance, the term social justice is usually applied to comprehend all three aspects of justice in the society, i.e., social, economic, and political.

4. Economic Justice –

The liberals refer to the satisfaction of economic needs of the people in the society as justice. The Marxist view is that economic justice prevails only after the abolition of private property.

Liberals:

According to Liberals, the demands of economic justice are satisfied if certain welfare services are provided by the State. During the 17^th and 18^th centuries, liberalism regarded free competition in a free market society as the key to economic justice.

Marx:

Marx associated Economic Justice with the mode of production in a society. Economic Justice can be secured only in an exploitation free socialist economic system. There can be no economic justice where people are divided into the rich and the poor, exploiters and the exploited. Marxism associates economic justice with the abolition of private property and the establishment of communism.

John Rawls’ Theory of Justice:

It is one of the most important theories in the field of jurisprudence and Political Science. His work has left a landmark, introducing a legal theory that aims for a society with liberty, equality, and justice for all. Rawls’ influence in the field is evident, as he attempted to provide a moral theory which is an alternative to utilitarianism and addresses the problem of distributive justice.

John Rawls’ concept of Social Justice gives emphasis to fairness, i.e., it must be fair to all, to the most talented as well as the most disadvantaged section. Rawl proposes an experiment where the individual is behind the veil of ignorance. He concludes that the nature of society to be established would give priority to the following in Lexical Order:

1. Maximum Personal Liberty
2. Equality of Opportunity
3. Difference Principle

It follows that any principle of justice, including those that regulate economic and social inequalities must be acceptable to all and help each citizen pursue his or her conception of the good.

In the Indian context, the positive discrimination in favour of certain disadvantaged sections can be considered as the incorporation of the 3^rd principle of Rawl. In India too, we have given maximum liberty and equality of opportunity for free enterprise. We have provided for a number of welfare programmes as a safety net for the disadvantaged sections to protect them. The Constitution of India has favoured to establish an egalitarian society instead of a meritocratic society.

Rawl argues that the only way we can arrive at a fair and just rule is if we imagine ourselves to be in a situation in which we have make decisions about how society should be organised, although we do not know which position we would ourselves occupy in that society, i.e., we do not know what kind of family we would be born in, whether we would be born into an “Upper” caste or “Lower” caste family, rich or poor, privileged or disadvantaged.

Rawl argues that if we do not know, in this sense, who will be and what options would be available to us in the future society, we will be likely to support a decision about the rules and organisation of that future society which would be fair for all the members.

Rawl describes this as thinking under the “Veil of Ignorance.” He expects that in such a situation of complete ignorance about our possible position and status in a society, each person would decide in the way they generally do, i.e., in terms of their own interests. But, since no one knows who he would be and what is going to benefit him, each will envisage the future society from the point of view of the worst-off.

The “Merit” of number 1 position is that it expects people to just be their usual rational selves, they are expected to think for themselves and choose what they regard to be in their interest.