Democracy without Justice is tyranny

          Democracy without Justice is tyranny

The founding father of English political philosophy, Socrates the Great, was sentenced to death by a democratic parliament in ancient Greece just for raising his voice and questioning the status quo. Therefore, his pupil, Plato the Great, strongly criticized democracy and named it a tyrannical form of government due to its unjust behavior and attitude. It demonstrates that democracy is only wanted and desired for justice, and if there is no justice in a democracy, it can be termed "tyranny. Justice and democracy are interrelated concepts. Justice is the basic pillar of democracy and therefore, democracy must uphold justice. The first and most important principle of democracy is the equality of citizens before the law; if citizens are not equal before the law in a democracy, it is injustice, and injustice leads to a tyrannical form of government where different people are treated differently. Another major principle of democracy is the protection of fundamental rights—the right to life, liberty, property, etc.—and justice is achieved when such rights are protected; if not, there is tyranny. In addition, the supremacy of law or constitution is the basic theme of democracy, and it is possible only in a just environment; when there is no justice, there can be no democracy. Similarly, democracy is desired for the separation of power, and when power is concentrated in the same person or organ, society becomes unjust, and an unjust society is a tyranny. An independent judiciary and free media are the fruits of democracy, and when such fruits are suppressed in a democracy, it converts into tyranny. In a word, democracy revolves around the principle of justice alone. If justice is excluded, the government can be called a tyrannical form of government.

On the face of it, democracy is the name of equality—the equality of citizens before the same law. When citizens are treated equally before the same law, irrespective of their gender, color, caste, authority, or power, it is justice. Democracy is desired and aimed at such justice. In the opposite case, when people are not equal before the same law and different people are treated differently—when there is speedy and cheap justice for the elite class and expensive and delayed justice for the common man—it is tyranny, not democracy. Democracy is the name of a practice where a ruler and a common man stand on the same footing before the same law, and when it is followed, it can be called justice; when it is not followed, it can be called injustice, and democracy must be based on justice or it will cease to be a democracy.

In addition to equality, the protection of all the fundamental rights of citizens through an independent judiciary is the central theme of democracy. Justice is when all the fundamental rights are protected, and democracy is when justice is ensured. In contrast, when fundamental rights are not protected, a state of injustice arises, which leads to a tyrannical form of government. In this sense, justice and democracy are interdependent concepts—both justice and democracy are dependent on each other—and the exclusion of one, e.g., the exclusion of justice from democracy, is equal to removing pillars from a building. Without justice, democracy is a building without pillars. So the protection of fundamental rights is the basic pillar of democracy; without such a pillar, democracy is a guise for the justification of tyranny.

Another prominent feature of democracy is the supremacy of the constitution or law. It is also the first principle of the rule of law, the concept given by A.V. Dicey, and so the first principle of justice too. In this sense, the supremacy of the law is the basic principle of three major concepts: the rule of law, justice, and democracy. Neither justice nor democracy nor the rule of law can be ensured without the supremacy of the law. In contrast, tyranny is the only form of government where the concept of supremacy of the law does not exist in any form. It shows that a system of government can be divided into democracy and tyranny only on the basis of the "supremacy of law'. The supremacy of the law is democracy, and therefore it is justice, while the supremacy of any person, a ruler, is tyranny, and therefore it is injustice. So democracy must be based on the principle of justice, or it will cease to be a democracy.

Democracy is also desired for separation of powers, and separation of powers leads to justice, while tyranny is desired for the concentration of powers in a single hand, and concentration of powers in a single hand leads to injustice. One of the great English philosophers, Montesquieu, states in his theory of the separation of powers that more powers make a person more corrupt. He said that when legislative and judicial powers are concentrated in one hand, the fundamental rights of citizens are jeopardized. Similarly, the concentration of executive and judicial power in a single hand leads to a state where the police become the interpreters of the law, and when all the powers are concentrated in a single hand, it leads to a tyrannical form of government. So democracy must ensure separation of power, and separation of power is justice, or it will cease to be a democracy and convert into tyranny soon.

An independent judiciary and free media are the symbols of justice that are primarily desired by democracy. In contrast, in a tyrannical form of government, the media is highly controlled, and it shows only those things that the ruler wants to show to the public. Similarly, judicial powers are also exercised by the ruler, either directly or indirectly. What does it show? It shows that a government can be called just when media and judiciary are free—when media and judiciary are free in a government, such a government can be termed a just government, and when judiciary and media are not free, such a government can be called an unjust government. So it is justice, and only justice, that determines the nature of government. If there is justice—free media and a free judiciary—it is a democracy, and if there is injustice—controlled media and a controlled judiciary—it is tyranny.

In conclusion, democracy and justice are interdependent concepts that revolve around each other. Democracy is primarily desired for justice, and justice can be characterized by equality of citizens before the law, supremacy of the law, protection of fundamental rights through an independent judiciary, separation of powers, a free media, and an independent judiciary. When any of these principles are excluded, it converts into tyranny where different people are treated differently, the ruler has supreme authority, not the law, fundamental rights are jeopardized, and the media and judiciary are controlled. In such a situation, justice is compromised, and therefore, democracy can never compromise justice, or it would cease to be called democracy and instead be called tyranny. So democracy must be based on justice, or it will cease to be a democracy.