External Law versus an Internal Law
Today in class, we were discussing the benefits and the detriments of laws being created and enforced by either an external force or an internal one. Joshua made reference to the Furies and their ancient, dogmatic values, saying that an external force could be divine in nature, and that Agamemnon as well as the other Argives could represent an internal force. Joshua also proposed a question to the class, asking for our opinion on the matter.
The problem with external laws and punishment, whether they be divine or not, is its inability to adapt and change. Justice formed and operated through outside means has a tendency to be closed-minded, and apt to a traditional and inflexible ways. This can create problems for those ruled by this type of law and justice.
Internal laws, though they have a tendency to spark bias, they also have the ability to change. Instead of viewing every illegal act as an illegal act which must serve the standard punishment, laws created and compensated for within a society can be viewed through a case by case scenario. Because of this, internal law can change and evolve. This provides the defendant with a better chance to avoid punishment.
Though because of this, those within and affected by the system would be and are required to sacrifice a few rights. Some of these rights include trial completely without bias. Because the internal forces at work are bias by nature, it would be completely impossible to remove all bias from justice obtained internally. Bias however can be reduced, and should be reduced if an internal law has precedence which allows for one to see that it’s a small sacrifice for what can be and is gained.
Another sacrifice would be the knowledge of what is law and justice, or the façade of knowing such. With an external force creating and regulating the law, those affected by it have something to base their attitudes of right and wrong, of justice and injustice on. They can directly reference this force or this force’s motives and decisions, using it as a basis for morality and justice. With an internal creation of law comes ambiguity in terms of morality; one in unsure whether laws are influenced by morality, or whether morality is influenced by law. What this allows for is the ability for groups of individuals to suggest the creation of new laws-law by the people for the people.
In an age of synchronization and immigration, where the idea of justice from one culture blends with the idea of justice from another, one must stop and question whether we would want our laws to have the ability to adapt to such influence. With an external force law and punishments are set and cannot be changed. But with internal forces ruling law and punishment change is inevitable, and in law that which varies from the traditional, and allows a case to not be viewed as a whole, but rather viewed as an individual, advances us towards true fairness, towards justice.
"But with internal forces ruling law and punishment change is inevitable, and in law that which varies from the traditional, and allows a case to not be viewed as a whole, but rather viewed as an individual, advances us towards true fairness, towards justice."
ReplyDeleteI agree wholeheartedly with your analysis of the advantages and disadvantages of external and internal law- but I don't believe a legal system based solely and exclusively on internal law necessarily moves a society towards justice.
You noted that trials in an internal law system would be inherently partial. Trials conducted on the basis of external law would apply uniformity to a fault. In The Eumenidies, the furies, reject Orestes' explanation immediately, refusing to acknowledge the presence of mitigating factors. Extenuating circumstances such as self defense and battered person syndrome would have no place in a completely indiscriminate judicial system.
At the same time, internal laws are whimsical/capricious by nature, especially in societies with unstable governments. If political capital is consolidated in a chosen few, internal laws can be easily modified to provide greatest benefit to those in power, and exploit the weak. These conditions are often present in genocide.
Both categories of law have significant flaws. Ideally, the two could co-exist though I personally believe that's not a viable possibility. I do believe, however, that it should be noted that internal law can and has been manipulated in a blatantly discriminatory fashion.
I totally agree with Hirsh Sharma....Atleast thats the case which we have seen in India...
DeleteI don't believe that an internal system that includes all people would be discriminatory, unless the people themselves are discriminatory. It's like you said, "If political capital is consolidated in a chosen few, internal laws can easily be modified to provide greatest benefit to those in power and exploit the weak." I however would see this consolidation as a shift from the laws being truly internal, to an almost external status. It’s when the people lose the ability to construct, manipulate, and enforce laws, that the laws and the enforcers become external.
ReplyDelete