'…there is nothing like a perfectly just society.'
Special Features
Written by Dr. Amartya Sen
September, 2009
Presently he is professor of philosophy and economics at Harvard University. He has been a visiting faculty at the London School of Economics, Oxford University, M.I.T., Stanford, Berkeley, and Cornell.
In his recent visit to India, Sen while talking to the media maintained that the theory of justice must be more concerned with the elimination of removable injustices rather than engaging itself with a hypothetical 'perfectly just society'. Dr. Amartya favours construction of a new theory of justice, one which is not based on abstract ideals or emanate from perfect institutions but rather, deals with this complex issue in both its historical sense as well as how the system of justice works at a practical level.
How exactly do you define justice?
Justice is a complex idea, which has everything to do with everyone being treated fairly. But the theory of justice must be concerned with the systematic assessment of how to reduce injustice in the world, rather than concern ourselves with what a hypothetical "perfectly just society" would look like.
There may be no agreement on the shape of perfect justice but we can still have reasoned agreement on many removable cases of manifest injustice, for example, the presence of widespread hunger and deprivation, or the lack of schooling of children, or the absence of available and affordable healthcare. If we do not eliminate removable injustices, then we are living without justice in a more practical sense. In India, we need to concentrate on removing all manner of injustices.
It is extremely shocking that we have not done enough to eliminate gender inequality. The widespread maternal undernourishment that leads to fetal death is another form of gender inequality. I have always maintained that gender deprivation, gender inequality, and child deprivation all go back to the deprivation of women. These are the big injustices, which we need to pay attention to.
Do you think the government is doing enough in terms of providing food security for the poor?
The significance of the right to food cannot be denied. The Indian government needs to work more comprehensively in this regard. Today, atleast 38 % of Indians live below the line of poverty and the number is feared to increase. There is a need for the government to spend an additional $1.9bn to the present to ensure food security. However, there is also a need for the haves in India to look after the interests of the have-nots and engage to a greater extent to fight off the injustices this deprived section faces.
Do justice and human rights go hand-in-hand or are they different ends of the spectrum?
The idea of human rights is being invoked by activists these days, often with admirable effect. However, critics argue that the idea of such non-legal rights is lacking in foundation. A frequently asked question is: where do human rights come from and what gives them force? Human rights have a strong foundation through public reasoning, and how that foundation relates to the basic analysis of social justice, which too is very dependent on the opportunity of public discussion. It is not so much that the concept of justice has come only to mean human rights but that the two related ideas go together.
Do justice and democracy go hand-in-hand?
Democracy and the real practice of democracy do assist in the advancement of justice. But this is not to say that if you do not have democracy, there is no way that you can advance justice because that can still be done. Many countries, which are not democratic, have done so.
So we have degrees of justice and degrees of injustice?
All practical debates on justice speak about enhancing justice so there must be degrees of justice. But it is a strange irony that while practical debates about justice stress the need to enhance it, the theory of it is all about perfect justice. The two seem to belong to two different universes.
TrackBack URI for this entry
Subscribe to this comment's feed