Does our justice system truly seek out justice, the truth, blindly appying our laws to all equally? If so how does it attain these ideals? Or, is our justice system currently bankrupt and if so how has is broken and at what point is that breakdown most significant? Is it justice for an individual to go bankrupt defending against charges s/he is not guilty of, and should the government be required to re-emburse those who are vindicated? How would this positively and negitively affect our legal system and society?
2006-09-20 05:00:25 · 4 answers · asked by Serenity 7 in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
The lady holding the scales is not blindfolded for nothing...
2006-09-27 06:58:30 · answer #1 · answered by Juliette 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I presume you're talking about the American justice system. The answer is that justice is one of several goals. The system is also designed to be efficient and to be consistent. Each of these ideals competes with each other. Perfect justice is profoundly inefficient, as is consistent justice. Consistency can be superficial (more efficient) or more soul-searching (more inefficient, and questionable as to accuracy).
The overarching goal of the justice system is stability--providing for a system in which individuals and companies can understand what their rights and obligations are with relative certainty. Though justice may be lacking in the discrete case, designing a system that eliminated all injustice would consume far too many resources relative to the cost of the injustice to society. By analogy, we could make the interstate highway system perfectly safe by reducing the speed limit dramatically and designing cars like tanks. Such an interstate system would also deprive the nation of virtually all the benefits a transportation system would confer, and the same would happen in a perfectly just justice system.
If an individual has been proescuted maliciously, some recourse should be available (whether it is or not depends on the jurisdiction). If, however, the prosecution was done in good faith, reimbursement would negatively affect prosecutorial judgment by discouraging too many prosecutions.
In the end, an imperfect justice system is best for society, as long is it provides enough stability and its errors are relatively small and correctable.
2006-09-20 05:59:24 · answer #2 · answered by Nate 2 · 1⤊ 1⤋
No, it's not about justice or truth it is about winning and losing money and power.
2006-09-27 15:27:50 · answer #3 · answered by koolhand_kent 3 · 2⤊ 0⤋
the justictice stystem is to make sure all laws are upheld and legally and that if its that you get money and so on.
2006-09-27 05:17:30 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋