“The concept of Just and Unjust is contextual. What was just a year back, may turn out to be unjust in today’s context. Changing context should be constantly under scrutiny to prevent miscarriage of justice.” Examine the above statement with suitable examples.

Introduction

The concept of justice is dynamic and evolves with societal, cultural, and technological changes. What is considered just in one era or context may become unjust in another due to shifts in values, norms, or circumstances. For instance, the abolition of slavery, once deemed acceptable, is now universally recognized as a moral imperative. This underscores the need for constant scrutiny of justice to prevent its miscarriage.

Key Dimensions of Justice and Contextuality

Justice as a Contextual Concept

1. Evolving Moral and Ethical Standards

• Example: LGBTQ+ rights were once criminalized in many societies. In India, Section 377 of the IPC was decriminalized in 2018, reflecting a shift in societal acceptance and moral understanding.
• Analysis: This highlights how justice adapts to changing perceptions of human dignity and individual rights.

2. Legal Frameworks and Judicial Interpretations

• Example: The Right to Privacy in India was not explicitly recognized until the Puttaswamy judgment (2017), which declared it a fundamental right under Article 21.
• Analysis: Legal systems must evolve to address emerging challenges, such as data protection in the digital age, to ensure justice remains relevant.

3. Cultural and Social Norms

• Example: Practices like child marriage were once socially accepted but are now considered unjust due to their adverse impact on children’s rights and development.
• Analysis: Justice must align with progressive cultural norms to protect vulnerable sections of society.

4. Technological Advancements

• Example: The advent of Artificial Intelligence (AI) has raised questions about algorithmic bias and fairness in decision-making processes, such as hiring or loan approvals.
• Analysis: Justice systems must adapt to ensure accountability and transparency in the use of technology.

5. Economic Realities

• Example: The global minimum corporate tax initiative reflects a shift in addressing tax justice, ensuring that multinational corporations contribute fairly to economies.
• Analysis: Justice must account for changing economic structures to prevent exploitation and inequality.

Challenges in Scrutinizing Changing Contexts

• Resistance to Change: Societal inertia often delays the recognition of injustices (e.g., gender equality struggles).
• Subjectivity of Justice: Different stakeholders may interpret justice differently, leading to conflicts.
• Global vs. Local Contexts: What is just in one region may not align with the values of another (e.g., freedom of speech vs. cultural sensitivities).

Way Forward

• Dynamic Legal Systems: Regular updates to laws and policies to reflect societal changes.
• Inclusive Decision-Making: Engaging diverse stakeholders to ensure justice is equitable and context-sensitive.
• Ethical Oversight in Technology: Establishing frameworks to address emerging challenges like AI bias.
• Global Cooperation: Harmonizing justice principles across nations to address transnational issues like climate justice and human rights.

Conclusion

Justice is not a static concept but a living ideal that must evolve with changing contexts. As Mahatma Gandhi said, “Justice that love gives is a surrender; justice that law gives is a punishment.” To prevent the miscarriage of justice, it is imperative to ensure that our understanding of what is just remains dynamic, inclusive, and forward-looking.