Important problems of justice are raised by a project according to which the sovereign gives to victims the right to pardon a wrongdoer orally or in a testament. The author supports such an individualization of the right to pardon, which would turn the state into a contractor who is hired by citizens exclusively to guarantee them security and self-possession.
While making references to historic facts the author of the present paper shows that tolerance in communities is absolutely necessary. It is founded on: 1) acceptance of the objective sense of fundamental values; 2) justice in mutual relationships; 3) love as a force that stimulates co-existence of human beings.
The article points out the importance of the way of taking into account the fact that the claim demanded before the court is time-barred for the perception of the standard of protection of the individual’s rights in court proceedings. It is shown how it depends on whether the limitation period is taken into account ex officio or upon the objection raised by the person against whom the claim is brought.
The author has made an attempt to portray the concept of justice in the context of the ethos of social struggle. He tried to put the principles of justice Maria Ossowska and Zygmunt Ziembiński social reality assuming a process of socialization of the concept and the ethos of martial understood as a continuous social changes shaped by culture. The outline is based on three formulas developed by Ossowska justice and eleven conglomerates behavior that presented Ziembiński. The final conclusion is that the ethos of social justice as the value used may be reflected only in lawful activities.
In the text I take a closer look at the political paradigm of self-sufficiency as outlined by French philosopher Jean-Luc Nancy. The paradigm is at work in all traditional Western political views, ideologies and practices, and can be reduced to two schematic models of politics: that of the subject, and of the citizen. The models are seen by Nancy to be no longer relevant to the urgent demands of contemporary social and political reality; they are also held to be responsible for contemporary problems and crises in, and of, democracy. Nancy tries to present an another approach to political practice and focuses on the issue of the (social) tie as one that is not given in any substantial way but always remains to be tied, always to be decided and continually reshaped in a response to unforeseeable events. As a part of a sketch of a political philosophy of relation and non-self-sufficiency, Nancy discusses the issues of singularity, incommensurability, justice and ,,equaliberty'', and stresses the need for constant invention of new forms of a democratic politics. The latter is meant as a politics of ,,democracy to-come'', democracy that always remains in statu nascendi, in the process of eventual transformation.
The article presents the stance in adiscussion about the axiological preferences that should be considered by the legislator while enacting the law. In the light of growing importance of law and economics, the author makes an attempt to answer the question about which of the values — economic efficiency or justice — the organs issuing but also using law, should give primacy. The author presents different views on the meanings for justice and economic efficiency. Then shows the most important factors to be considered while enacting the law, so it may be economically efficient. Following this, he contemplates if enactment of law that is only economically efficient is sufficient. In conclusion the author delineates the view that the law may neither be only economically efficient, nor only fair. The legislator has an obligation and apossibility to take under consideration in the legislation the economic and social — including fairness’ — effects of the enacted law.
On the example of a workload dispute (a version of a ‘border dispute’) I present the general problem of two persons – M and P – with equal entitlements to one commodity, which is equally desired by both of them. They are both moderately altruistic; they are not angels untempted by a selfish willingness to get their own way, nor are they devils, who want to destroy others even if it leads to self-destruction. As human beings operating in a world of limited goods, they are so physically and intellectually feeble that neither of them is able to permanently enslave the other and submit him to the second person’s will. Such being the case, each solution to the problem means that the profit of one person is the loss of the second. The question, whether justice is possible at all, suggests itself whether in a situation when people are more or less equal, or with limited altruism and/or selfishness and scarce resources.
The process instruction Dignitas connubii was a document long anticipated by the employees of ecclesiastical jurisdiction in Poland, all the more so that it had been announced by Pope John Paul II in his speech to Roma Rota. In addition, in those not so distant times, some employees of ecclesiastical courts in Poland still remembered previous process instruction Provida Mater (1936), alongside its great signi cance for ecclesiastical jurisdic- tion after Pio-Benedictine codi cation of 1917, thus, hopes and expectations related to the new process instruction were considerable. Today, ten years after the publication of Dignitas connubii, it is a special moment to discuss the question of canonical matrimonial process because we are between the meetings of the synod of bishops on the institution of marriage and family, and a commission for the study of reform of the canonical matrimonial process has been appointed. What is more, the fact has been also reported by mass media which, for obvious reasons, have taken particular interest in that issue. Of course, the above situation generates a lot of attention in the Church itself, for a number of reasons. Being aware that our role is not to create or modify the existing church procedural law but virtually to apply it accurately, it should be emphasized that instruction Dignitas connubii was accepted with due respect and obedience by the employees of ecclesiastical jurisdic- tion in Poland, particularly because it was published in the last year of the ponti cate of John Paul II and also on his initiative. Therefore, from the very beginning it was perceived as vademecum for the canonical matrimonial process as Pope Benedict XVI said about the instruction Dignitas connubii in His rst speech to Roman Rota in 2006. Undoubtedly, today we should take care about indicating clearly that the matrimonial process is something exceptional in the Church; in the ecclesiastic community it should not be perceived as a standard but as an exceptional situation. It is an important mission of the Church now and a serious pastoral problem: how to protect the indissolubity of marriage, not only in the process but also in the doctrinal aspect? However, when it comes to the marriage process, we should ensure that it is right, transparent and just.
PL
Instrukcja procesowa Dignitas connubii była dokumentem wyczekiwanym przez pra- cowników sądownictwa kościelnego w Polsce, tym bardziej że została ona zapowiedziana przez papieża Jana Pawła II w przemówieniu rotalnym z 1998 roku. Dzisiaj, dziesięć lat po opublikowaniu Dignitas connubii, jest też szczególny moment, aby dyskutować na temat kanonicznego procesu małżeńskiego, gdyż została powołana specjalna komisja papieska do reformy kanonicznego procesu małżeńskiego. Dobrze funkcjonujące sądownictwo kościelne winno pozostawać jasnym oraz wymownym znakiem, że Kościół pozostaje sprawnie funkcjonującą instytucją. Był to niewątpliwie jeden z celów prac nad instrukcją Dignitas connubii, ale – jak uczy doświadczenie – nie wystarczy mieć tylko dobre prawo, trzeba je także dobrze stosować, przede wszystkim poprzez dobrze przygotowaną kadrę pracowników sądownictwa kościelnego. Należy podkreślić, że instrukcja Dignitas connubii została z należytym szacunkiem oraz posłuszeństwem przyjęta przez pracowników polskiego sądownictwa kościelnego, tym bardziej że została ona opublikowana w ostatni roku ponty katu papieża Jana Pawła II, jak również powstała z jego inicjatywy. Stąd też od samego początku była ona postrzegana jako vademecum dla kanonicznego procesu małżeńskiego, jak powiedział o instrukcji Dignitas connubii papież Benedykt XVI w swoim pierwszym przemówieniu rotalnym z 2006 roku. Życzliwe przyjęcie w Polsce instrukcji Dignitas connubii nie oznacza automatycznie, że jej opublikowanie nie spowodowało pytań dotyczących natury dokumentu oraz sposobu jego ogłoszenia, które to wątpliwości pojawiły się także w światowej kanonistyce. Trzeba powiedzieć, że kościelny wymiar sprawiedliwość jest dzisiaj w bardzo trudnej sytu- acji – przede wszystkim biskupi winni być tego świadomi oraz winni uważać ten sektor życia Kościoła, często w przeszłości zaniedbywany, za przedmiot ich szczególnej odpowiedzialności osobistej o pierwszoplanowym znaczeniu. Do sytuacji, w której pracują dzisiejsze sądy kościelne, trzeba także dodać bardzo powszechny relatywizm moralny oraz idący za nim, niestety zakorzeniający się także w środowiskach kościelnych, relatywizm dotyczący swobodnego oraz wybiórczego interpretowania normy prawnej. Niestety znakomita w tej materii alokucja rotalna papieża Benedykta XVI z 2012 roku została bardzo została szybko zapomniana.
The paper refers to selected problems of exploitation in the face of justice. The analysis is based on the definitions of exploitation contained in the Polish Penal and Civil Codes. The main subject of our interest is the identification of the necessary and sufficient conditions for the recognition of exploitation as being unjust. Supplementary question will refer to a specific type of justice which should be considered in this case. In respect to this we should consider retributive, distributive and social justice. Another important factor in this regard is the accepted theory of value. In the considered subject we will focus on the labour theory of value. The principal problem could be reduced to questions whether the exploitation is ipso facto unjust and how these two phenomena are related to each other.
Der Band enthält die Abstracts ausschließlich in englischer Sprache.
EN
This article discusses the concepts of “justice” and “injustice” in Shakespeare’s two plays: Merchant of Venice and Measure for Measure. The application of laws and its effects on the social life are the basic themes of this study. Shakespeare concluded these plays so masterfully and open endedly that it is now reader’s responsibility to decide whether the court and society are “just” enough. This study tries to give some examples from both of the plays admitting that the concept of “justice” is hard to define. The conclusions will shed further light on the discussion about the justness of Shakespearean plays.
FR
Le numéro contient uniquement les résumés en anglais.
The relations between the sovereign courts and the intendants contain a tormented and unsuccessful history, marked since the Grand Siècle by the difficult passage from the traditional jurisdictional management of the kingdom, considered inefficient, to an organisation that supports the triumph of the absolute and administrative monarchy. In these southern lands of the kingdom of France, torn apart by the Protestant reformation and the wars, the institutional upheaval which prepared the modern state and the Napoleonic granite masses, was carried out through strong embarrassments which opposed the intendant of the generality to the court of aids in Montauban. As soon as they were created, the magistrates of the jurisdictional company multiplied the manoeuvres against the intendant to safeguard their contentious attributions and the control of the municipal funds. Their particularistic actions were denounced by the intendant, who was there to make the king present everywhere in the kingdom and was zealous in his service. Since then, all the elements were in place for the outbreak of a noisy quarrel – the lawsuit against the intendant Gaspard Lescalopier – which worried the government at the turn of the reign of Louis XV, in the middle of the tax war in 1749, when King Louis XV, whom the subjects looked upon as a charming prince, became „Louis the Unloved”. These tumults prevented the modernisation of the French monarchy and led to the troubles of the Revolution.
Rawls’s theory of justice is based on Kant’s ethics and the theory of social contract. Rawls tries to obey two rules: of universalizations and universality and of the maximization for the least privileged. His theory can be used to judge the ethical position of business firms. It follows from my studies that a just organization of a firm is rare in times of transformation. This may be another reason for mass emigration and it must be taken into account in future debates of the economic development.
The focus of this article is on the question of social justice in contemporary Nigeria as depicted in Wumi Raji’s Another Life and Julie Okoh’s A Haunting Past. Using analogies to the Roman god, Janus and John Rawls’s assertions on the concept of justice as the basis for analysis, the article evaluates the nature of justice in Nigerian society: the operations of the legal system, the role of law enforcement agents, crime and punishment, and the application of justice in the Nigerian electoral process, as these issues are presented in the plays. Both plays rely heavily on irony to illustrate that in Nigeria, the application of law is arbitrary; and that oppression and violence are integral parts of politics and governance. The article further argues that, like Janus, the Roman god, the concept of justice in contemporary Nigerian society, and by extension, African societies, is two-faced; it can be good or ugly depending on which side an individual finds himself/herself at any point in time. The article shows that the same social institutions and persons entrusted to uphold justice are those who perpetrate forms of injustice. Ironically, in Nigeria, and as the two playwrights seem to suggest, justice and injustice are the same god, wearing different faces at different times.
The judicial power of the Church as any authority in the Church always tries to build good of the believers. It expresses a principle derived from the Code of Canon Law: Salus animarum suprema lex, which means that the most important task for the Church is the salvation of man. An expression of this principle are marriage processes which can declare the nullity of the marriage. The judge has a very important place in the Church’s justice system. It is the duty of the judge to look after justice and peace in the community of Godʼs people. Justice is a virtue which the judge ought to demand also from himself. Therefore, he should permanently improve moral precepts in himself. He ought to develop good manners and everything which can influence the realization of the principle of justice. Ecclesiastical courts confirm that for many litigating parties in marriage cases, proceedings concerning cases of nullity of marriage, have a practical purpose, which is to regulate life in a new marriage. But we cannot forget that the primary purpose of marriage process is to know the truth about marriage. Therefore, judicial power, which judges or judicial colleges possess, must be exercised in the manner prescribed by law, and it is important to judge fills all the steps in the canonical process of declaration of nullity of marriage carefully and with due observance of the law.
This article concerns the topicality of the message of the apostolic exhortation of Benedict XVI Ecclesia in Medio Oriente regarding the issue of social-religious nature on building unity in diversity. Unity is being built through actions about inner and external peace and justice in love and mutual respect, whose source is Jesus Christ. It is necessary for the credibility of the testimony of communion of Christʼs disciples, obliging for constant conversion, formation and life consequences.
The paper examines the beginnings of biblical monotheism. The author indicates the period of the Babylonian exile as the moment of the emergence of this idea in Israel. Psalm 82 is interpreted here as a testimony to the monotheistic transformation. The author advocates a literal understanding of the content of the psalm, as an image of the judgement over pagan gods, which ended in their condemnation to death. The reason for this dethronement of the entire pantheon is the permanent inability of the gods to ensure justice on earth. According to the psalmist, it is a feature of the only true God, which is the God of Israel, called upon to take power over the whole earth.
The paper refers to selected issues of exploitation in the face of justice. The analysis is based on the definitions of exploitation contained in the Polish Penal and Civil Codes. The main goal is the identification of the necessary and sufficient conditions for the recognition of exploitation as being unjust. A supplementary question will refer to a specific type of justice which should be considered in this case. In this respect, we should consider retributive, distributive and social justice. Another important factor in this regard is the accepted theory of value. In the presented considerations, we will focus on the labour theory of value. The principal issue can be expressed by the questions whether exploitation is ipso facto unjust and how the phenomena of exploitation and justice are related to each other.
The article discusses the problem of natural justice which has been considered by Aristotle in his (1) Nicomachean and Eudemian Ethics and (2) Magna Moralia. In his Nicomachean and Eudemian Ethics Aristotle says of natural justice that it is changeable and not the same everywhere. The implication seems to be that no action, not even murder, is always wrong. But, as is evident especially from his Magna Moralia, Aristotle distinguishes justice into the “what” (equality), the “in what” (proportion between persons and things), and the “about what” (what things are exchanged with which persons). The article concludes that Aristotle allows for variability only in the “about what,” while in the “what” and the “in what” he allows for no variability.
The Book of Wisdom, which was written on the eve of the New Testament, enriches significantly the Old Testament teaching about God’s payment. In the very heart of the eschatological part (chapters 3-4) it presents three situations, which at first glance seem to question God’s justice (the suffering of the just one, lack of offspring, premature death). The analized text (1-9,5, 15-16) is the most important expression of the awareness of afterlife gained by the Israel in the late period of the Old Testament and the most powerful evidence of that belief.
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.