|
Taking the initiative
07/06/2005 The Star Articles of Law with Bhag Singh
Justice is a word which is appealing as
well as important and significant. Justice is some thing that everyone would
want to see exist and against whose existence few would even want to
protest.
Yet many people are inclined to consider
that they have not been justly treated and therefore have been subjected to
an injustice. This encompasses a very wide area and requires an examination
of the entire scenario in which the complaint and grievance is made.
However what has prompted me to write this
article is the occurrence where a person finds himself faced with a
situation involving difficulties and where legal issues are involved. In
such a case, going to court may be necessary and the services of a lawyer
required.
A reader points out that engaging a lawyer
can be expensive and therefore a person who finds that his rights have been
infringed or breached is often unable to pursue remedies if he does not have
the financial means. Is it therefore not unjust?, he asks.
 |
|
Nepalese Sherpa women staging a protest rally against a
perceived injustice.
|
The question is indeed a straightforward and simple one. However the actual
situation may not be so simple and straightforward. This is because the word
justice is a broad and covers a wide variety of situations; its implications
could be equally diverse.
For the purpose of this article, the word injustice is examined in the
context of the legal aspects and legal implications that arise and in which
people find themselves involved.
There are different attributes to the word injustice used in various
situations. An act may be done which may appear unjust but is permitted by
law. In such a case, it cannot be said that the law is unjust because the
law is silent though what happened may be unfair.
Then there could be situations where the law is itself unjust because it
perpetrates and perpetuates an injustice. In such a case what happened may
be regarded as being unjust but is not unjust according to the law for so
long as the law exists. In such a case, it is for the legislature to amend
the law.
Yet in other cases, the law may be just but the manner in which it is
interpreted may cause an injustice. In such a case it becomes necessary to
challenge the unjust administration of the law through the available
channels constitutionally provided for.
In a way it would appear contradictory to think about a law itself causing
an injustice. However, this is not entirely unthinkable because it can
happen though the extent or gravity of it may differ in various situations.
Laws have evolved from principles of morality, virtue, and uprightness. It
could be said that what initially was the law would also have been what was
just and fair and proper. Morality and law at one time have been or may have
been identical or near identical. However in a changing world, what is now
law is not necessarily what is morally required and accepted. Therefore,
there are situations when what is legally right may not appear morally
correct.
Apart from the moral issue, developments in society that have been brought
about by economic and commercial development have changed the context in
which certain laws were thought of, formulated and introduced.
For example, in the area of health and treatment, there are instances in
which a law was enacted to curb the activities of quacks in a highly
unregulated environment.
However the relevance in such an instance may be suspect when the present
highly regulated environment is considered.
The strict implementation of the law without regard to the underlying
structural changes which have taken place will end up creating a certain
amount of unfairness when the changed environment is not taken into
account.
On a different note, an aggrieved person may find himself in a disadvantaged
position if he lacked resources to obtain professional legal advice and
help. This is a reality because legal aid is not a service that the state
provides to each and every individual.
In this, the legal arena is not alone though it had been so in the past. The
state is gradually distancing itself from the direct responsibility of even
providing medical services; this is not only seen in our own country but has
become a trend even in states where health care was traditionally considered
a responsibility of the state.
As in other areas, the individual must therefore look after himself when
legal problems are encountered, and need to be faced and overcome. In this
the cost factor can be a hurdle and, for some people, an insurmountable
one.
However cost alone does not deprive an individual from asserting his rights.
Even those who do not have the required financial resources can help
themselves by personally getting involved and pursuing the remedies
themselves; some individuals have done this, though it may not always be
possible.
In other cases there are various Legal Aid bureaus set up by the government,
the legal profession and other sectors of society to help individuals to
deal with such situations. There are also lawyers who, without publicity,
help individuals on a pro bono basis, asking perhaps to be reimbursed for
out-of-pocket expenses (sometimes even without this). Unfortunately the work
of such lawyers usually goes unnoticed compared to the more sensational
complaints that attract media attention.
At the end of the day, individuals who feel aggrieved are not always left
out in the cold. However, it is important for all such individuals to be
committed to pursuing the remedies for the grievance. They must not leave it
to others to fight the battles |
