Is justice for all possible

¶ … JUSTICE' for ALL' POSSIBLE

The objective of this work is to answer the question of whether justice is possible for all individuals. The method used to examine this question will be one that is qualitative in nature and that is conducted through a review of literature of a peer-reviewed or academic nature. The ideal of 'justice for all' is one that has its roots in the American society and the establishment of America as a democracy and a society in which all individuals, regardless of their race, sex, ethnic origin, or religion are all on the receiving end of equitable or equal justice or fairness. However, the application of this ideal is a great deal more complex than the ideal appears upon initial consideration.

WORLD JUSTICE

In 1948 the Universal Declaration of Human Rights was adopted by the United Nations and was an initiative chaired by Eleanor Roosevelt. This declaration was formulated with the intention of providing a definition of universal human rights and to promote observance of them" and as well focuses on equality and fair treatment. This declaration also affirms the rights of the individual to property, nationality, marriage and family, religion and thought, peaceable assembly, participation in government, social security, work, rest, healthy standards of living, education, and cultural expression. Within the framework of this declaration are the rights and freedoms of all individuals to give and receive respect of one another and their own individual rights which are stated in the limitations of law that everyone is subject to.

II. JUSTICE for ALL ACT of 2004

In 2004 the 'Justice for All Act' or H.R.5107 was passed by both the Senate and the House. This act has to do with the rights of those who are victims to crimes and their rights in terms of being protected from the accused.

III. JUSTICE in the COURTROOM

The Code of Judicial Conduct states "A judge shall perform judicial duties without bias or prejudice. A judge shall not, in the performance of judicial duties, by words or conduct manifest bias or prejudice, including but not limited to bias or prejudice based upon race, sex, religion, national origin, disability, age, sexual orientation, or socioeconomic status, and shall not permit staff, court officials and others subject to the judge's direction and control to do so." [Canon 3(B)(5)] This Canon addresses justice in terms of how individuals are treated in the courtroom and clearly states that no prejudice should be shown against or in favor of an individual for the same personal factors as set out in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Reports that have examined the drug sentencing courts in the United States have stated findings that overwhelmingly show that African-American men are sentenced to prison for drug crimes far more often than are White men and the same holds true for African-American women. The gap in the rate of incarcerations of African-Americans as compared to White individuals. Another injustice that is often witnessed is the defendants who after having been arrested for some crime and do not have the resources or ability to pay bondsmen in order to continue to work until the trial to be able to do so because they cannot pay the bondsmen while other individuals accused of a similar crime often bond themselves out quickly. This is a prime example of the failings of justice for all in that the individual who is innocent may actually be conceived as guilty due to their inability to pay the bond fee required by the bondsman.

IV. BARRIERS to 'JUSTICE 'FOR ALL'

There are barriers that stand in the way of all individuals experiencing the same level of justice as other experience and these barriers may include those which are structural and socio-economic as well as other barriers to justice which include gender, race, and ethnicity. In other words, there are barriers effectively in place barring individuals from being on the receiving end of an equal level of justice based upon their socio-economic status even if the barriers of race and ethnicity are not present while someone of the same race in another region of the world or a different country area that will be on the receiving end of an inequity in justice based solely on the individual's race.

V. EXAMINATION of FACTORS AFFECTING JUSTICE

Cultural and societal barriers for justice include the barriers faced by individuals in a society that does not speak the primary language of the country in which they reside and as well human assumptions present additional barriers as individuals are stereotyped and as well regional differences result in inequitable justice towards groups of people in the society whom would not receive less justice than others if there were located in another country, state or even city or town due to the area in which they reside being predominated by an inequitable mindset as compared to other areas that they might reside.

Justice is experientially differentiated among various individuals and groups and is relative in that the amount of justice one might receive is generally based on the mind-set of the individuals and the collective group in which the individual is an actor. Therefore, the amount of justice one receives depends greatly on the group that the individual aligns themselves with on the social, economic, political, and personal levels.