OJBs Web Site: Blog Page

Note: You are currently viewing my old web site. There is a new version with most of this content at OJB.NZ.
The new site is being updated, uses modern techniques, has higher quality media, and has a mobile-friendly version.
This old site will stay on-line for a while, but maybe not indefinitely. Please update your bookmarks. Thanks.

Add a Comment (Go Up to OJB's Blog Page)

Law or Justice?

Entry 311, on 2006-04-07 at 12:16:24 (Rating 3, News)

Sometimes you have to make your choice between the law and justice. Traditionally the two words have been used more or less interchangeably, but there are times when its clear that they don't mean the same thing at all. I've always recognised this, and refer to our system of law as a "legal system" instead of a "justice system", a term that is often used by others.

The reason I'm blogging about his topic now is because of a high profile court case which has been in the headlines here in New Zealand for the past few weeks. It involves an allegation of rape against three current and ex police. The verdict of innocent was recently delivered, and it looked fair because there was no objective evidence, and the main independent witness seemed to cast considerable doubt on the alleged victim's story.

I was happy that everything seemed to have turned out as it should, but then a group started distributing information which had been suppressed by the court. I can't say what it is here, but thanks to the Internet, and a few people openly flouting the law on suppression, practically everyone knows what it is anyway.

This information was so significant that it was bound to make a difference to the jury's decision. But it was suppressed and the jury never got to see it. If we are going to trust a jury to make the right decision in cases such as this, shouldn't we trust them with all the information that they might need? Is it fair for a judge to select what they are and aren't allowed to see? Of course it isn't. This is a case where the law has been upheld, but justice hasn't.

I'm not necessarily saying the verdict should have been guilty, but I am saying let's give all the information to the jury so there can be less doubt that they will make a well-informed decision. The fact that this case involved the police, including a senior officer, doesn't help. The assumption many people will make is that the police are being protected. Again, I'm not saying this is actually what happened, but if judges are going to arbitrarily hide relevant information its going to look that way, and that's just as important.

I've increasingly noticed that the Internet, especially the blogosphere, is providing a means of distributing this sort of information, and that is a good thing. The law looks stupid because it is being made irrelevant in this case. Sometimes that's necessary, because justice is always more important than law.

Comment 1 (675) by anon on 2007-06-24 at 19:18:11:

I found this extremely useful for my legal studies essay "is the law and justice the same thing".

You can leave comments about this entry using this form.

To add a comment: enter a name and email (both optional), type the number shown above, enter a comment, then click Add.
Note that you can leave the name blank if you want to remain anonymous.
Enter your email address to receive notifications of replies and updates to this entry.
The comment should appear immediately because the authorisation system is currently inactive.