The current scenario in the judicial system that send criminals to their destiny is more supporting to the criminal and hence crime rather than the party whose offended. This is a proposition that can be easily helped by common sense. The agencies working for criminal justice have turned out to be seeking justice for the sake of justice. The question arises as to what is just ? And whether it would be democratically decided or philosophically speculated or religiously governed.
And we can move not a single inch forward without answering this question. Greeks like Aristotle have discussed in lengths about justice which to replicate today finds no practical applications. Ludwig von Bar(1999) writes: Influence of Aristotle. — Aristotle has certainly obtained a deeper comprehension of the problems of criminal law than any of the other philosophers of antiquity.
For the theory of responsibility, which even to-day is considered meritorious, we are indebted to his opinion (found in the Nicomachean Ethics 1(“Eth. Nicom. ”, V, 8. )) that the right to punish is derived from the will of the party punished. This view, however, is imperfectly set forth in the theory of an involuntary contract. In this respect, Aristotle attained no following in ancient times, and the manner in which he sought to solve the problem strikes us as being artificial and unsatisfactory.
An open mind will regard punishment (in its ordinary sense) and reward as correlative, and both are derived from a distributive justice, and not from an equalizing justice governing the field of private rights. (p. 387) (1) Christian studies also give account about justice on account of the Old Testament which have not been successful to remain popular among the protestant ethics governed modern democracies. Islam speaks about justice in a similar and more elaborate fashion (an eye for an eye) but in the current context is seen across the globe as medieval aged barbarism.
What modern age law makers have decided to present before the rest of the living masses as justice in general and criminal justice in particular is a confused set of ideas having roots in some popular morals, some celebrated mental philosophies and some not so loving ideas but still prevalent ideas from religion. The point here is to outline this problem of decision as to what are the standards that will decide the methodology for criminal justice. And also important is how far can we cope with the crime while using a hit and trial method to evolve a just Criminal Justice system.
The whole discussion above has been considered from an ethical point of view of a human being. If the paradigm shifts to a consideration of real world facts the best claimed democracies are seriously under charge of generating the worst of crimes against the sovereign nations. And this inference will lead to really shake the foundation of democracy itself among thoughtful minds. References Bar, L. von (1999). A History of Continental Criminal Law Translated by Bell, T. S. et. Al Union, New Jersey: THE LAWBOOK EXCHANGE, LTD.