The law may be hard to observe or difficult to obey, but it remains the law and must be therefore followed just the same. This is the plain and simple meaning and implication of the above cited Latin maxim which is well known in a special way by those in the legal profession. The Latin principle is objectively right and the legal experts are professionally right as well when invoking the Latin truism — but only by virtue of the following three fundamental premises: Firstly, that the law is just in its objective content, just for the subject party concerned, and just to the society as a whole it is mandated for observance. In other words even but there is an iota of injustice in the law in conjunction with any of the said qualifying factors, a law may be difficult to comply with, but an unjust law it remains. Thus it is that it loses its nature and finality as a law. Example: The eVAT as a law is unjust because the very poor and the very rich are taxed the same amount in their purchase of consumer goods! Secondly, that the law equally applies to all — “without fear or favor.” This simply means that everybody has exactly the same standing — the same basic human dignity and the basic human rights — before the law. This is the cornerstone of the majesty of the law: it bows to no one for consideration of power and wealth. Precisely, herein hinges the majesty of the law — or this becomes a joke. Example: Recently, nothing less than a whale in authority and might wriggled out of the legal net while two small fries were caught! Lastly, that the law is interpreted and applied by a legal system that is not simply working as designed and expected — but categorically working according to the demands of social justice, especially in terms of its distributive dimension that is provident of public welfare or common goods. And this is distinctly not the case when those entities and individuals tasked to act accordingly, either do nothing or act to the contrary. Example: The dysfunctional justice system in the country. Source: The Daily Tribune URL: http://www.tribuneonline.org/commentary/20100603com5.html |
|
features from SOBRIETY for the PHILIPPINES:
(Without Fear or Favor)
Specials:
Dura lex, sed lex VIEWPOINTS Archbishop Oscar V. Cruz 06/03/2010
Thursday, June 3, 2010
Posted by
Jesusa Bernardo
at
9:25 PM
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Blog Archive
- ► 2012 (2791)
- ► 2011 (4620)
-
▼
2010
(4195)
-
▼
June
(394)
-
▼
Jun 03
(14)
- Presidential appointments EDITORIAL 06/03/2010
- No blaming Smartmatic? FRONTLINE Ninez Cacho-Oliv...
- China, Myanmar to shore up ‘marriage of convenienc...
- Gobbledygook BLURBAL THRUSTS Louie Logarta 06/03...
- Dura lex, sed lex VIEWPOINTS Archbishop Oscar V. ...
- Breaking bread with demons By Ronald Roy COMMENT ...
- A stone’s throw from Nile, Egypt’s taps are runnin...
- Poll fraud seen in reconfiguring CF cards By Gerr...
- Null votes, poll memo slow canvassing 06/03/2010
- Carry out GMA broadband project, Palace urges new ...
- PERC: RP has third worst bureaucracy in Asia 06/0...
- DND chief claims fraud but won’t make move By Mar...
- DFA: UN report false on AFP use of kids in armed c...
- Noynoy Aquino hard to please and satisfy By Aytch...
-
▼
Jun 03
(14)
-
▼
June
(394)



0 comments
Post a Comment