A menudo, nos encontramos con situaciones en las que rápidamente emitimos juicios sobre la justicia o injusticia del momento. Pero, ¿qué es la justicia?
Esta es una de las primeras preguntas que te hacen al empezar en la carrera de Derecho. Ante un delito, alguien es detenido, se desarrolla el procedimiento de acuerdo a la ley y hay una sentencia; si se le absuelve, ¿es justo? La respuesta rápida es que si realmente lo hizo, la sentencia es injusta y el juez es el malo de la película.
Es ahí cuando aprendemos a distinguir entre "justicia formal" y "justicia material". Lo sé, habrá quien esté pensando que la justicia es justicia y punto. Explicar esto siempre me da dolor de cabeza, pero no me doy por vencida, sigo intentándolo. La diferencia entre ambas estriba en que una es objetiva y la otra subjetiva.
La justicia formal se limita a verificar si se ha cumplido con el procedimiento, si se han respetado los derechos y garantías de las personas y si ha cumplido con la legislación vigente, en otras palabras, si se han respetado las reglas del juego.
La justicia material depende de nuestros valores, creencias y experiencias individuales. Cada uno tenemos nuestro propio concepto de lo que es justo o injusto. Así hay gente que considera que descargar contenido gratis de internet es justo y gente que está en contra por considerar que es injusto con los autores. Dependiendo de nuestra educación y creencias, juzgaremos las situaciones como justas o injustas y discutiremos con otros por este motivo (sólo hay que ver los distintos colores de las manifestaciones y protestas que se organizan con respecto a un mismo tema).
De esta forma, podríamos encontrarnos ante procedimientos formalmente justos cuyo resultado puede ser materialmente injusto. Algunos dirán que el problema no es el procedimiento sino que la ley es injusta. Pero injusta ¿para quién? Por ejemplo, dependiendo de mis valores y creencias, la idea de libertad de despido me parecerá una injusticia suprema o será algo perfectamente justo y razonable.
Lo ideal es ese momento en el que la justicia formal y la material se encuentran, pero ese punto de unión no será único ni indiscutible; siempre habrá alguien que no crea que se ha hecho justicia, por ejemplo, cuando el culpable es condenado, habrá quien piense que las consecuencias fijadas en la sentencia son injustas o no lo suficientemente justas, o que las medidas adoptadas por una determinada norma son insuficientes.
Antes he dicho que esto nos lleva a discutir, incluso de forma muy acalorada, ya que se trata de algo que nos toca lo más íntimo de nosotros mismos, nuestros valores y creencias. Por eso es muy importante conservar la calma cuando nos encontramos con alguien que tiene un concepto de justicia diferente al nuestro, respirar hondo y tratar de entender qué proceso ha llevado a esa persona a pensar de esa manera. Se trata de entender al otro aunque no se comparta su punto de vista.
________________________________________________
Frequently, we face situations in which we make judgements about its the justice or injustice. But, what's justice?
This is one of the first questions you are asked when you start the Law degree. In the event of a crime, somebody is arrested, a procedure is carried out according to the law and there's a rule; if he is found not guilty, ¿is that fair? The fastest answer is that if he really did it, the sentence is unfair and the judge is the bad guy in the movie.
It's in that moment when we learn to distinguish between "formal justice" and "material justice". I know, some will think that justice is justice, period. Explaining this has always brought me some headaches, but I'm not giving up, I keep trying. The difference between both of them is that one is objective and the other is subjective.
Formal justices consists only in verifying whether the procedure has been followed properly, people's rights have been respected and the law has been obeyed, in other words, if the rules of the game have been followed.
Material justices depends on our values, beliefs and experiences. Each of us have our own concept about what's fair or unfair. This way, there are people who consider that downloading free things from internet is fair while others think it's unfair for authors. Depending on our education and beliefs, we'll judge situations as fair on unfair y we'll argue with others for that reason (we only need to take a look to the different protests and demonstrations organised regarding the same subject).
According to this, we could be before formally just procedures whose result can be materially unjust. Many will say that the problem is not the procedure but the unfair law. But, who is unfair for? For example, depending on my values and beliefs, the idea of employment at will can be either a huge injustice or something perfectly right and reasonable.
The ideal situation is that moment when both formal and material justice meet, but that point won't be unique and undoubted; there will be always someone who don't believe that justice has been made, for example, when the criminal is condemned, there will be somebody who thinks that the consequences stated in the ruling are unfair or not enough fair, or that the measures adopted by a specific law are insufficient.
I've already said that this leads us to arguing, even in a heated way, because it's something that touches the most intimate of ourselves, our values and beliefs. That's why it's so important to keep calm when we face somebody with a different concept of justice, breath deeply and try to undertand what has make that person to think that way. It's about trying to understand the others even if we don't share their point of view.
________________________________________________
Frequently, we face situations in which we make judgements about its the justice or injustice. But, what's justice?
This is one of the first questions you are asked when you start the Law degree. In the event of a crime, somebody is arrested, a procedure is carried out according to the law and there's a rule; if he is found not guilty, ¿is that fair? The fastest answer is that if he really did it, the sentence is unfair and the judge is the bad guy in the movie.
It's in that moment when we learn to distinguish between "formal justice" and "material justice". I know, some will think that justice is justice, period. Explaining this has always brought me some headaches, but I'm not giving up, I keep trying. The difference between both of them is that one is objective and the other is subjective.
Formal justices consists only in verifying whether the procedure has been followed properly, people's rights have been respected and the law has been obeyed, in other words, if the rules of the game have been followed.
Material justices depends on our values, beliefs and experiences. Each of us have our own concept about what's fair or unfair. This way, there are people who consider that downloading free things from internet is fair while others think it's unfair for authors. Depending on our education and beliefs, we'll judge situations as fair on unfair y we'll argue with others for that reason (we only need to take a look to the different protests and demonstrations organised regarding the same subject).
According to this, we could be before formally just procedures whose result can be materially unjust. Many will say that the problem is not the procedure but the unfair law. But, who is unfair for? For example, depending on my values and beliefs, the idea of employment at will can be either a huge injustice or something perfectly right and reasonable.
The ideal situation is that moment when both formal and material justice meet, but that point won't be unique and undoubted; there will be always someone who don't believe that justice has been made, for example, when the criminal is condemned, there will be somebody who thinks that the consequences stated in the ruling are unfair or not enough fair, or that the measures adopted by a specific law are insufficient.
I've already said that this leads us to arguing, even in a heated way, because it's something that touches the most intimate of ourselves, our values and beliefs. That's why it's so important to keep calm when we face somebody with a different concept of justice, breath deeply and try to undertand what has make that person to think that way. It's about trying to understand the others even if we don't share their point of view.
No hay comentarios:
Publicar un comentario