Dichotomy In The Justice System

As we all know, the law sets boundaries to guarantee its citizens the rights and freedoms as drafted in the constitution and the charter, however, but the thing in question is, how much of that is valid and has the goal been achieved or not? Throughout the years, there has been an ongoing debate on the effectiveness of the justice system which even until now remains controversial. Hence why it’s essential to conduct a comprehensive analysis to deconstruct law and its assertion of equality in our society. Through this, unknown biases appear which allow a person to understand the reality of the law as a false dichotomy, especially in the context of the official version of law. In other words, law is traditionally and contextually specific and
(Comack, 2006) Within this justice system, legal actors such as judges and legal advisors, are evidently expelled from their one-sided perspectives and hence nobly ready to judge fairly from an unprejudiced point of view. (Comack, 2006) Be that as it may, the ability to dehumanize a man keeping in mind the end goal to satisfy the role of a reasonable and just arbiter is near impossible. One of the most known legal symbols across the globe is Lady Justice. Blindfolded, carrying the scales as if they’re used to dispense justice. Her being blindfolded implies she is not bias or influenced by the characteristics of those who she is judging; she is blind to things such as race, gender, and class. This picture as we know it represents how the law sees itself, which is nothing short of impersonal and unprejudiced based on how Naffine explained it by stating “the official version of law- what the legal world would have us believe about itself- is that it is an impartial, objective and neutral system for resolving social conflict and establishing justice.” (Comack & Balfour, 2004
Evidently, the justice system demonstrated their corruptness in the following case which is about the murder of an aboriginal woman named Pamela George. Pamela was a woman who infrequently worked in the sex trade business to support her children. She was killed by white skinned, middle-class men who as university athletes occupied an unearned privileged social location. The two men who committed the crime were heard speaking publicly about the killing while making statements such as “She deserved it. She was Indian.” This murder wasn’t just a plain act of violence but was caused by two white supremacists proving that race still continues to shift the course of law in a major way within Canada. What is even more surprising was that the jury failed to find the two men guilty of first-degree murder which brings us to the conclusion that the justice system has once again failed aboriginal people. This jury’s decision triggered antiracists and organizations that involved women and aboriginals which organized and spoke out against the trial. Eventually, it resulted in public accusations about the influence of racial bias in the justice