Introduction
The conceptions of law and justice vary across nations and regions. The differences in the conception of law and justice between Western and East Asian evidently compares with each other. The comparative criminal justice and law notions between East and West depend on culture and historical backgrounds. The cultural diversity in East Asia makes its law and justice perceptions vary with the West. The concept of crime and justice in the West ends up based on the individualistic concept in which units for examination are individuals. On the other hand, East Asia concept reflects on the notion of crime and justice as a collective orientation under relational concepts. Regarding criminal justice and crime in the West, the targets are the crime while East Asia focuses human relations. Accordingly, the western and East Asia concepts of law and justice also have some similarities like the molding of morality and adherence to the set rules. This paper compares and contrasts the Western and East Asia conceptions of law and justice.Differences between Western and East Asian Conceptions of law and justice The concept of law and justice differs between the Western and East Asian because an understanding of what crime is in the two regions varies. When the manner in which crime ends up understood is different, the process of acquitting and convicting and the entire judgment will ultimately turn out dissimilar (Daniel, 14). According to the Western conceptions, crime end up regarded as any act performed by an individual in the violation of the criminal law defined by the State. The State and the citizens (offenders) are separate entities with one having a higher authority over the other. The people turnout regarded as inferior to the state with all expectations in abiding by the rules set in adherence to the state constitution. The legal frameworks consider criminals as individuals who fail to submit to the State’s obligations. Sterbalova argued that in the West, a citizen turns out considered as an offender when there is a conflict between the State’’ expectations and the act perpetrated (30). For instance, drug trafficking is a crime only when an individual engages in it because the State laws prohibits it. Citizens start to abide by the law out of fear of not breaking the criminal law that orients the State as superior to offenders. In the Asian conceptions, crime turns out understood as any harm done to social relations and victims. The crime is dealt with from a social set-up point of view unless the West that regards crime from a political specialty (Theodore and Irene, 301). In East Asian, criminal offense focuses on the relations between the victim and the offender. The law and justice have the responsibility of ensuring social order and peace in the East Asian countries. Any act that negatively affects the good social relations in East Asian faces judgment. The process of ruling checks on acts that harms any member of the society or the entire society. According to Daniel, the culture of the East Asian nations allows for the law and justice to protect individuals at the group level from crimes (12). In the East Asia countries that crimes are any acts that hinders good social relation. It turns out expected by the society that all citizens ought to work out in ensuring stable social relations. A crime in East Asian means acting against social relations while in the Western conceptions it means to act against the State. Sterbalova demonstrated that in East Asia conception crime is not a State-centered public issue because the social relation varies according to the contexts and the type of crime perpetrated (31). The East Asian concept of crime is relational, depending on the harm done to the victim or the society, but not State-centered. In the West, crime is a State centered in which the State has powers to punish the offender in case a crime ends up identified. The Western legal frameworks work under the assumption that the State represents the interest of the people and the entire public (Daniel, 14). The reason for crime as per the Western conceptions of law and justice is thus when interests of the citizen fails the consistency with the States interests. People end up expected to follow the State interest since there is an assumption that the latter is a representation of the former in dealing with interests’ fulfillment. In the course of carrying out judgment, the State-centered concept of crime allows for offender-centered-justice. Sterbalova argued that the offender-centered-justice in law occurs because the State is superior in comparison to the offender. Therefore, the law allows the protection of the offender through rights as a way to allow for a just and a fair process during judgment. In contrast, the East Asian judgment works in checking on the level of deviation from the social norms established for strengthening social relations. Sterbalova stated that the rule strives in bringing peaceful relations between the members of the society in the East Asian conceptions of law and justice (41). On the other side, in the West, ruling happen for creating peaceful relations between citizens and the State. Any person that works against the social relation in any manner of weakening it through causing harm to victims or the entire society faces judgment in East Asia. The East Asian law and justice accord justice by allowing reflections at a group orientation unlike the Western that centers at an individual criminal. The relational concept of justice as applied in the East Asian law works towards repairing the social harm caused by the offender. On the other hand, Western conception of law and justice strives towards changing or preventing further conflicts with the State (Theodore and Irene, 291). In the West, the State punishes the offender when legal procedures confirm any contrary against the State expectations. Contrarily, in the East Asia, a solution to the harm is sought in case a relational hindrance ends up identified by the law. When critically analyzed, it is evident the manner in which judgment ends up arrived at vary between the conceptions of law and justice between Western and East Asian. The Western approach of judgment that is offender-centered justice seems as unbalanced. On the other hand, the East Asian non-conflict approach is kinder balanced because of the efforts put in by the latter in bringing harmony in the society (Daniel, 17). Ruling in the Western conception of law and justice fosters towards superiority of the State and inferiority of the offenders unlike the harmonious manner of creating a social relation between the criminal and the victim or the entire society.
The Western judgment process will ultimately punish the offender in case of guilt because the criminal turnout as marginalized. The manner of ruling perceived by the Western law and justice is thus retributive unlike the East Asia that encourages rehabilitation. According to Sterbalova, the justice system in the West is unbalanced while the East’s turns out balanced because the former rules the criminal to punish while the latter is to rehabilitate the lawbreaker (33). In other words, in the Western conception of law and justice only the State benefits while in the East Asian both the offender, victim and the entire society benefits from the rule. The solution is likely to end up arrived at in East Asian while the West enhances more subjection of the offender to the State. There is a variation between the Western and East Asian’s conception of law and justice in truth revelations regarding different justice approaches. The western reveals the truth in the criminal justice by the use of a conflict approach while the East Asian uses the resolution approach (Theodore and Irene, 309). The use of conflicting approach is vulnerable to cause truth concealment. The exact issue of the case might end up not solved hence continued lawbreaking by the offender. Power variation between the State and offenders creates loopholes for truth cover up because the minor has little powers for defense. There is a direct connection between truth concealing and ranks of power and influence. On the other hand, the East Asian approaches of seeking truth through resolution of any social harm caused by the offender shows likelihood in revealing the truth. The Asian societal cultures regard either side of the conflict as equal in terms of power and influence. Sterbalova discussed that equity in law and justice between the offender and the Social relation leads to revealing of truth in the quest towards a resolution (37). Putting aside factors like power and rank between the victim and the offender in East Asian in the criminal justice system allows equal consideration of cases without the influence of superiority hence arrival to the truth. In the East Asian approach in arriving at the truth, using non-conflict approach seeks for a solution to the offense. There is the likelihood for a restoration of unity and harmony required in the social relation between the victim and the offender when a non-conflict approach ends up applied. In the West, the laws expect the lawbreaker to seem as ever conflicting with the set obligations during judgment. Contrarily, the East Asian’s encourages the offender to see the need for harmonious and peaceful social relations with the victim. The conception of law and justice in Western is kind of cultivating conflicting situations between the law and people (Theodore and Irene, 311). Comparatively, the East Asian encourages truth revelation in a peaceful manner because the offender ends up persuaded to confess the truth in a remorseful manner to receive forgiveness. Resolving a conflict through the expression of truth as used in East Asian leads to restoration of social relations as an exact issue ends up solved (Daniel, 9). In the Western conceptions of law and justice that solve a conflict using another conflict complicates the ruling process and justice can end up denied or delayed because the real truth keeps on concealed despite the appealing processes.
The differences in the conception of law and justice between Western and the East Asian are because of the variations in the legal systems between the two regions. The East Asian countries such as China operate under communist rule in its legal systems. Historically, East Asia relied on relationships, gut instincts and trust in the compliance to law and justice requirements in compliance to the communist rule. The ruling processes, criminal offence and understanding of crime surround the historical communist’s law and justice (Daniel, 17). Although formality of legal professionals in the East ended up adopted in the late 20th century, majority of the constitutional conception of law and justice have connections with the communist rule of justice in the society. Most of the laws in most of the East Asia countries have not adopted some of the laws in their constitution leading to the combination of both socialist and civil law. There is the use of fundamental beliefs of social relationships and the civilian law. There is adherence to the government requirement and social demand. There is the conception that the law and justice is for safeguarding the social relations amongst the people within the obligations of the country.
On the other hand, the Western conception of law and justice find its bases from the capitalism. The conception of law and justice regards that a justice society fosters towards a stable political and economic characterized by private owners. Individuals in the Western legal system consider the interests of citizens at a personal level unlike the communist rule of law used in the East Asia. According to Daniel, any act that interferes with the rights and liberties of an individual ends up accorded a crime in the West (10). In the East Asia, the act against the societal rights and liberties faces judgment. Individuals turn out allowed to fight for their rights and liberties as per the Western conception of law and justice. Comparative to the East Asia that accords the entire society with rights and liberties for good relationships. The East Asian Countries constitution has rights and liberties for people at the society’s level. The ruling process leads to the rehabilitation of the offenders to inflict in them the moral beliefs for social relationships. The victim ends up incorporated in the well-established social set-up to enjoy the rights and liberties at the group level.
The East Asian conception of law and justice allows citizen to work under the absentia of arbitrary power during ruling. Both the victim and the offender have the similar power concerning law obligations. The law under operation helps either of the sides for the betterment of the society. It ends up conceived in the East Asia that law and justice intend to help every individual in the society from harm by others. Daniel argued that in the East Asian, there is equality before the law to all people (11). On the other hand, there is inequality before the law in the Western countries because the State has power than the offender. Similarities between Western and East Asian Conceptions of law and justice Despite the many differences between Western and East Asian conceptions of law and justice, there are also some similarities. From the early proponents of Western and East Asian conceptions of law and justice who are Aristotle and Confucius respectively, law and justice turnout as meant for encouraging citizens in doing the right thing in both regions. The argument by Aristotle centered at the role of law and justice is to act as a discipline tool for habituating people to do the right thing (Daniel, 8). The same way in the East Asian Confucius’ idea of social relatedness calls people to do the right thing to prevent harm to others and the society. Confucius proposed that that the society requires laws and justice to give a leeway for the maintenance of harmony and peace amongst the members of the society. It is evident that the two regions conceive law and justice in describing its role as to encourage people in doing the right thing. Sterbalova showed that the constitution from both sides has chapters containing various laws purely designed for preventing or stopping people from doing immoral actions as a way of encouraging morality (45). As a result, law and justice play a similar role of providing guidelines towards acceptable behaviors amongst people in both the West and East Asia. There is a second similarity between the conceptions of law and justice between the Western and East Asian. In both regions, it ends up conceived that law and justice helps to promote a common good amongst people with different interests. Daniel illustrated that for the maintenance of order in the society, law and justice to draw people towards a common good (9). Both sides through bringing lawbreakers to account for their actions prohibit the pursuing of self-interest through evil deeds like murder and theft. The East Asian will bring the offender to face ruling where they end up encouraged to confess the truth through concerning the accusation in a remorseful manner for forgiveness. In the case of guilt, rehabilitation turns out accorded to initiate offender towards a common good. The same way, in the Western conception of law and justice during judgment, affirms a conflict in the manner of people acting against the common good. In case the criminal turns out guilty, the court accords a punishment as a way of instilling accountability in any a form of acts against the common good (Sterbalova, 33). In both sides, there is a similarity in calling people to a common good despite their varying self-interests. Lastly, there is a similarity in addressing matters regarding people’s rights and liberties in both the Western and East Asian conceptions of law and justice. In both sides, the constitution offers various rights and liberties to people calling for their protection. Law and justice in both regions protect the liberties and rights from any violations by other people, the government and organizations (Theodore and Irene, 321). In the East Asian, the law and justice offer people rights and liberties of having a good social relation in a harmonious way within the society. Any act violating the harmony and social relation rights and liberties of the individual leads to the offender facing the ruling for a restoration of social relation. The people, organizations and government turn out expected to act without violating the liberties and rights of other in enjoying a harmonious and peaceful social relation. In the same way, the Western conception of law and justice protects people’s rights and liberties from violations. People understand their rights and liberties and in case of any violation, the case ends up brought to the court for a ruling. Sterbalova argued that the judgment is for to reveal any act of violation against the plaintiff’s rights and liberties for a punishment in case of guilt (46). The law and justice and the whole process of judgment in the West work towards protecting the people’s rights and liberties, as it is the East Asian.Conclusion The variations in the conceptions of law and justice between the Western and East Asia is out of the cultural differences in the two regions. The Western center on individualism while East Asia is on socialism and their ways of living influences the way legal system and matters end up addressed. The varying social organizations in the two regions causes differences in which the concept of crime, justice and judgment turns out handled. Additionally, the philosophical framework, legal traditions and historical experiences differences between the West and East Asia predominates in the varying conceptions of law and justice. There is a divergence in the manner crime turns out understood between the two sides. In Western, crime ends up regarded as a conflict with the interests of the State while in the East crime is any act of that causes harm to the social relations. There is also a difference in the truth revelation during judgment. In the East Asia, truth ends up revealed through encouraging the offender to confess the truth in a remorseful manner for forgiveness while in the West truth ends up concealed as the criminal defends himself from the accusation. Furthermore, the ruling process in the West is a conflict approach while in the East Asia judgment uses non-conflict approach to reach a resolution and ultimately to a rehabilitation. Despite the divergence in the conception of law and justice in the two regions, there are some convergence seen as similarities in the matters of the role and purpose of law and justice in the society. They both call for instilling morality in people. The West and East Asia constitutions have moral laws that mold the peoples’ behaviors. Law and justice bring order in the society through calling people to a common good despite their varying self-interests in both sides. Lastly, there is a similarity in the protection of people’s rights and liberties by law and justice by both sides.
Works cited
Daniel Bell. “Beyond Liberal Democracy” New York: Princeton University Press. 2006. Print
Sterbalova Antonina. "The Social & individual; of the East and West Prospects of law and justice".16.1 (2009): 27-48. Print.
Theodore de Barry and Irene Bloom. “ Sources of Chinese tradition.” New York: Columbia University Press. 2001. Print
