justice

noun. mid-12c.," the exercise of authority in valediction of right by assigning reward or punishment," also "quality of being fair and just," from old french justice "justice, legal rights, jurisdiction"(11c.), from latin iustitia "righteousness, eqity," from iustus "upright, just"). the old french had wide spread senses, including "uprightness, equity, vindication of right, court of justice, judge." the word began to be used in english c. 1200 as a title for judicial, meaning "right order, equity" is late 14c. justice of peace first attested early 14c. in the mercial hymns, latin iustitia is glossed by old english rehtwisnisse. to do justice to(someone or something) "render fully and fairly showing due appreciation" is from 1670s.

opinion

opinioem noun. cf. 1300, from french opinion "opinion, view, judgments founded upon probabilities" (12 c.), from latin opinionem (nominative opinio) opinion, conjecture, fancy, belief, what one thinks, appreciation, esteem," from stem of opinar "think, judge, suppose. opine," from p.i.e. op -(2) "to choose"

conditioned by the judeo-christian biblical perception of the world, the europeans almost abandoned the use of the discerning faculty of reason, and used the memorizing faculty of the brains exclusively. now memory in itself does not tell one whether what one memorized is true. the bible is almost entirely made up of tall tales told and retold, and ultimately handed down from the pulpit to the believer. likewise, all religious stories are promoted to be factual accounts in believers' minds. these unquestioned accounts of the past set the standards to be followed in the present.

the jurisprudence un-prudently promotes the dispensing of justice based upon the precedence and precedent opinion is based on the laws written in antiquity. many of these laws are in stark conflicts with the current ways of life. this popular opinion of the public does not go hand in hand with the opinions of the court. an opinion supported by the precedence gives justices an excuse from to have to "render fully and fairly", something a party sponsored appointee of the supreme court would not be able to do otherwise. precedence reduces the blame for rendering an unpopular judgment. in many of the cases with the public perceptions divided along the party line the supreme court dispenses the judgment with only one swing vote favoring this side or the other. but even when their decision is unanimous, what they are issuing is merely an opinion, and even in the dictionary of the english language an opinion is what one gives out as an 'esteem based upon probabilities'. that is why, some prisoners do get death sentence erroneously, and get killed or languish in the death row for most of their lives.

justices are professionals with vested time, mind, and money in schooling in acquiring the skill, like any other professional. what is done professionally is devoid of the element of conscience. since their act does not personally affect them, it makes them even more callous towards the sufferings of others. justices pass a death sentence on to a person as readily as does a police or a soldier pull a trigger to kill someone, or a president orders a drone strike upon some probable suspect along with others, including children. there is nothing personal. if it were to be a fair and just perception of facts, there cannot be a dissenting statement of even one justice. in a one vote difference of opinion havocs are made in people's lives, persons have been sent to death chamber or in solitary confinement for years or for life. there have been 317 post-conviction dna exonerations in the united states, 18 of the 317 people exonerated through dna served time on death row, 16 other were charged with capital crimes but not sentenced to death. since 2000, there have been 250 exonerations.

however, before retirement, one arkansas governor commuted all death sentences in 1971 to clear his conscience. before the conscientious objection to taking up arms was recognized, it was an offence punishable by firing squad, to keep other recruits from deserting.

the supreme court judges occupy the bench till they are unable to look alive. federal judges are appointed for life. and that, too, is a contributing factor in cultivating callousness towards the pain and suffering of others. there have been recorded instances of bored judges falling asleep or doodling pictures on paper during the trial. besides, being formed of the royal english court, the u.s supreme court justices are no less lordly than the english judgeships in looks, outlooks and procedures. just as these lords have their work done for them. the u.s. justices have a plethora of law clerks and law student interns to do the looking for the precedence of the cases and the opinions rendered in the past. wearing the black robes the justices succeed in distinguishing themselves from the litigants and spectators. it is not much different from the way an actor dons a medical apron in tv commercials for the pharmaceutical ads to give out an impression that what he says is to be believed. but actor playing god does not become god, nor does the black gown in itself enable the judge to see things clearly. in most of the pictorial and stone carvings, the goddess of justice is blindfolded. however, there are a few greek, roman and oriental sculptures in which the lady justice has her eyes wide open. there are two conflicting opinions regarding what makes one impartial in rendering justice. blindfolded, one does not distinguish one side from the other. but it also renders one incapable to see clearly the evidence given.

the english influenced common law countries practiced the adversarial system of justice where two advocates represent their clients before a jury or judges who try to determine truth of the case. in other law systems a judge or a panel of judges investigates the case. in the adversarial system, the most effective lawyer convinces the judge or jury. the problem with this system is that the legal profession is very lucrative a profession. unlike any other service related profession the lawyers and medical doctors get their fees even when the case is lost or the patient dies. to look good, the system provides free legal assistance to the poor, and the law firms are made to represent pro bono. but in the ever so more crafty game of legalese, usually one who can spend more money wins the case regardless of the merit of the case. in it the witnesses are invented or bribed, evidences are tempered with and justices are lured to be corrupt. and with the increasing number of the female justices in the states and in the supreme court, there is an evolving difference of opinion offering a female sense of perception. all laws were written when the women were not even perceived to be the fellow human beings; they were not given the right to vote.

in the adversary system, the two advocates strive to convince the jury each one's own client to be in the right. and there in lies the folly of the system. in instances of disagreements, logically one of the two has a mistaken sense of perception, if both them are not seeing things right. the court of justice requires the accused, defender and their witnesses to tell the truth, and if caught lying under oath, it is called perjury, which is a punishable crime. and yet, one of the two lawyers representing one's client knowingly spins the game of word to prove one's client to be innocent of the crime. when losing the case, if the lawyer, too, is punished along with his client, no lawyer will desire to represent anybody without first separating right from the wrong.

in the colonial times, most people needing the help of the law were ignorant of the language of the foreign ruler. so they needed somebody to interpret to them the language and to speak for them. then, it was beneath the dignity of some rich and influential people to appear before the judge, or were too busy, to attend the hearing. so they would hire someone to represent them. from that it developed into a profession of legal representation. then, as with any other profession, it became so elaborate a craft, that even when the language of the court is the same as that of the litigants, the clients cannot fathom the depth of the law proceeding. it is not unique to the legal profession. it is in the best interests of the professionals to not let their customers understand their language. so also, all medical terms, all astrophysical and scientific explanations, all religious chants and hymns have been in foreign tongue. the official language of the science is latin. when the bible began to be translated in the local tongue, the christianity began to lose the believers. no wonder there is a growing apathy for science and the court of justice.

in theory, the justice system is separate from and independent of the governing body of the state. but in practice this separation is only when the government's power is not threatened. the power of weaponry of military and police force is with the state, and the state lends its use of force to the court ruling readily only to safeguard the state of being of the state. any one speaking ill of the state that the state perceives to be threatening is called a terrorist, and is handed over to the justice system to be punished. in recent times, all major states have taken over the legal proceedings from the court, and have incarcerated hundreds of people in conditions far worse and cruel than the ones practiced in the common penitentiaries, notably in guantanamo bay in cuba and in other off shore places. even though all these countries are independent sovereign nations, their rulers share cultural, racial, and ideological base. and in other instances they are bought off with payments in money and militaristic aid. in earlier times, when the church and the state separated, the separation was mostly in the physical facilities whence the state and the church operated. in practical terms, the people who managed the government and the church, belonged to the same ethnical and cultural group. and the state readily lent its power to safeguard prevalent way of life favourable to both. it is thus, that, despite the lofty worded declaration of independence of the united states of america, its first president could own slaves, and despite the civil war that was said to be fought on the ethical grounds, the racial, cultural and religious segregation still exists in the u.s.; the groups like k.k.k. still hold sway and the surgeon general's determination regarding the harmfulness of tobacco and other commercial products are transformed into obscure printed labels due to the power of money supporting the elected officials managing the state's affairs in the interests of the rich. and that makes the rule of law as negligible as are the ten commandments of the church. both these are imposed upon the children and the weak. in practice, the law is what the powerful determines it to be practiced by others excluding him.