Let us hope that one day we will manage to ensure that the boundaries of the legal and the just go in harmony and at the same time, because from that moment on, we can say that justice is done. And it has renounced the country`s right to sovereignty and self-determination by placing resources in the hands of large foreign financial capital and speculation on national capital; It submitted to the policies imposed by the IMF and the World Bank and violated the national constitution and all the rights of the people. I myself might argue or disagree with aspects that I have abandoned in this article. These are things that stay in the air. We have seen too many examples of legal bias, if any, to trust those who apply it. The people`s jury can be as effective in judging as it is denied. I never knew whether it was better to regulate hot or cold. I do not know if it is a question of temperature. The law is based on the evidence of the evidence.
That`s how clear it is, even if we pull our hair. Everything indicates that the subject is guilty, but the final proof is missing: a hair, a slime, a signed paper. Back with Garzón. It is clear that his own colleagues in the guild wanted it and it showed in the disproportionate sentence. However, the law was cold with the case. A case of espionage was convicted and they caught it. There is no doubt that Garzón belongs more to the realm of justice than to law. We can call him a righteous man, but not a legal man. And therein, as they say, lies the crux of the matter. That is why we have to be careful when it comes to drafting laws, legislating, because then comes the fateful moment of implementation.
We are tainted by a racial and mischievous mentality, tinged with revanchism, tired of partisanship. And this is undoubtedly reflected in the application of the law. How difficult it is for the legal and the just to coincide, how complicated it is for true justice to be protected by the law, how powerless to control how many times the right is unjust and how often the just is never protected by the law. In the exercise of the law, it is very easy in practice to find justice other than that which the citizen seeks protection, an interpretation other than his own conception of what should be just in his situation, and this because, in addition to the difficulty of proving reason in all cases, We must add the aggravating factor. that the third party who judges also has his or her own subjective sense of administering justice. (by Adolfo Pérez Esquivel) Today, the country`s Minister of Security and the Minister of Security of Buenos Aires Province are talking about the legality that land confiscation is illegal and threatening punitive sanctions for the detention of people looking for housing. The “financial corralito” that cornered all small and medium-sized savers who confidently deposited their funds with banks are now defenseless, victims of successive governments that have sanctioned unjust laws and vilified financial centers and banks that have taken control of people`s savings. How do you distinguish just law from unjust law? The legal from the illegal, the just from the unjust? Logic dictates that everything that is legal is fair. Unfortunately, this is not the case; Often the law is unjust, there are laws that violate the rights of people and people.
The Gospel teaches: “He did not come to abolish the law, but to confirm it. Man is not made for the law, but the law for man. These values have been changed and despised, and people have been subjected to unjust laws. The Dean of the Court of Human Rights of Cordoba, José Carlos Romero Roa, comments on the decision of the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) in Strasbourg, after abrogating the Parot doctrine according to which “not everything is just legal, and not everything is just legal”, while affirming that “from a personal point of view, There are many things that can hurt me. But from a legal point of view, there are a lot of things I have to do because that`s my job and it`s the fulfillment of legality. The great thinker, who was Henry Thoreau, inspired many people and generations with his proposals to confront injustices in a non-violent way in the defense of civil rights, deepening the behaviors and ethical values of individuals and societies. She has been and is a source of inspiration and practice in the search for truth and justice. There were those who knew how to discover in their teachings the ways of freedom and defense of the rights of individuals and peoples, who used civil resistance as a method and condition of life, among whom inspired Mahatma Gandhi. He put into practice action and reflection, that is, the coherence between saying and doing. The right to democracy is inscribed in daily life and constitutes a conquest of freedom that makes it possible to achieve equality for all. It has ceased to fulfill the mandate of the people to govern democratically for all.
Just look at the increase in endemic diseases, illiteracy, lack of resources for life and development of populations. He has shirked his obligations, both to this government and to those that preceded it. These brothers, whom Pope Francis calls “disposable objects” of society, are accompanied in solidarity by the Slumpriester, by churches and social organizations that work in the region with the inhabitants of the villages. They need a fraternal and caring hand of society to help them find social security and dignity as human beings in a democracy. I ask you to remember that democracy and human rights are inseparable values and that you have the right and equality of all. But despite all this, laws are necessary, we need an order, imperfect, but an order, because it gives us security, gives us hope and faith in the realization of the desired justice. And it is in this task that we engage, and even engage, when, in the exercise of our legitimate right to vote, we choose those who will be the architects of our laws, those who try to define what is right and what is not, and who end up creating ever new unjust situations. Therefore, it is important to know who we will vote for, who will be our champions, first legislate and then fight in court, because they are the ones who will fight through their actions for the personal and unique justice of the client before the spheres of reality. Romero Roa defends that judges “are subject to the principle of legality”, so that “it is up to the legislator to decide on the content and timing of the promulgation of the norm”. He recalls that “the Criminal Code was amended only in 1995 and that certain issues relating to the full execution of sentences were only amended in 2003, this is the reality”. What a paradox! If injustice and reparation did not exist, we would not try to change them with laws to achieve the desired justice.
And it turns out we do and then we end up with another new unjust situation that creates another law. The whiting biting its tail or the infinite desire to control everything when nothing is completely under our control. It is necessary to establish the legal framework of what is just and what is unjust; True from false. Law is a right for which peoples have fought throughout their historical lives and the life of humanity; It allows us to live together and the respect we owe each other as citizens. The right to democracy is inscribed in daily life and constitutes a conquest of freedom that makes it possible to achieve equality for all. It states that every citizen aware of his responsibility has the right to oppose injustices and must be prepared to bear the consequences of disregard for unjust laws. Justice and justice do not always go hand in hand. Moreover, they rarely go together. How many times have we heard the phrase: “There is no justice in this country”.
Justice belongs to the club of great words such as liberty, equality and fraternity, to name just three examples. This does not prevent us from taking care of them. Communism also had the ambition to save humanity, but its implementation led to a degeneration of the original, ever purer. Man dictates laws, and therefore such laws can never attain perfection. For example, is the verdict against Judge Garzón fair? For many, this is not the case. But it turns out it`s legal. And the law is cold when enforced. In fact, society is full of unjust laws. Well, we don`t all understand the same thing when we talk about justice.
For others, a prosecution may be fair if the criminal is paid in the same room. Therefore, there is often little difference between the righteous man and the right man. Justice can be exercised in the quickest and most brutal manner, regardless of the legal reasons. Every brainless person can have their own version of what is right. The death penalty, for example, can be the just application, the punishment that every murderer deserves. None. There are unfair laws, but there are also really excessive applications of the law. We all want a fair trial, but no one agrees. It is always legitimate to be wary of those who inflate their mouths with justice and legality. Go to God as I did in this article. “Rule of law”, “The law is the law” are phrases that are published quite frequently.