Freedom of Choice, Rights and Justice: A Reflection

To deny people their human rights is to challenge their very humanity.

Nelson Mandela

Every time I utter the word freedom, a rush of untold chronicles of men and women
who had come before me breathes out the word for me. There is a deep thought buried in it and
freedom is now becoming an archive of both hidden and uncovered longing to be truly free. A
mix of emotions was created by urban legends and historical trails, and is constantly being
rebuilt by the battles of todays society. To get a dose of reality, the state of being free seems to
be a privilege for some who do not know that they always have a choice; those who are
oppressed by the economic conditions of this so-called life.

By the time I entered elementary, the educational system taught us to acknowledge and
exercise our basic human rights coupled with a careful judgment in order to also respect another
human persons rights, thereby allowing them to exercise theirs. As what I can always recall, the
elders kept on telling that our rights end where others begin. An invisible boundary surrounding
one person indeed exists. In our family life, we are encouraged by our parents to make a choice
of our own as we grow older. They make it a point that we understand that no matter what plans
they may have laid out for us, the final decision should always come from us. It was during one of
lifes turning points that I was able to say that there is a very thin line between respecting our
parents judgments and doing what we really choose to pursue. Yet it should always appear to us
that the most important part is the process on how to get to the other side without paralyzing
either our parents will or ours.

Having freedom of choice is not a vested privilege; rather, it comes from the basic rights
of being human. It is the closest thing to realizing our human dignity. We are nothing without our
dignity, and without dignity there can be no rights to fight for. That is the very essence of
becoming true human persons. We are governed by the truth and the good in the exercise of
our freedom. Having to make a choice embodies that one has freedom and that one is living
without restraint in the context of what is good. I have specifically learned that a right comes
with a corresponding duty that we too must perform so as to make way for others to fully
exercise the same right.

Truth be told, we are often mislead by the phrase without restraint. There are a number
of interpretations that can possibly lay down the practical words that a simple man can easily
grasp. To make it easier to comprehend, we are only free in what is humanly true and good. An
action that does not conform to what is true and good are proofs of the failure of freedom.
Therefore, freedom is not really a license to do whatever we want, but to do what is true and
good. When it comes to making choices, especially the life-changing ones, it is important that
information concerning the alternatives is available to allow us to make intelligent and voluntary
decisions. On the other side, if we are not given the chance to get the true information which we
need, whatever we have at hand will lead to deception and such would indicate that our
freedom has been violated thereby inhibiting us from exercising our right.

To elaborate on the topic regarding our rights, there is a question as to how much do we
really know of our rights. As students, the list of our rights and duties is placed in the Universitys
Student Manual. But what are included in the manual are not inclusive of all the rights that we
have. We are also given access to the laws which enumerate expressly other kinds of rights. We
have our legal rights as well as our moral rights. It is recognized that we have the inherent dignity
and equal and inalienable rights as the foundation of our freedom, justice and peace in the
world. This is to give an emphasis that all humans are born free and equal in dignity and rights.
We are endowed with reason and conscience. Thus, everyone has the right to life, liberty, and
security.

Aside from the freedom of choice, we also have the freedom of thought and freedom of
expression and a lot more. But basically, no one should dictate how one should live his or her life
except in the matters that concern the morality and the goodness of a choice of action. After all,
we are interconnected to one another, and most of the time there is a need to consult our
parents and the elderly in our community for life advices in order for us to live a good and
prosperous life.

Now, Justice comes into the scene. A life of prosperity does not lean on a society that
does not encourage justice. It may be relative for some, yet justice covers the areas wherein
each of us tries to exercise our rights only to find out that some had unfortunately gone beyond
their boundaries. The concept of justice is almost always interchanged with fairness. To me,
fairness means giving everyone an equal share of a pie without considering each members
status or life condition. Whereas equity means that each one gets what he or she needs based
on his or her capacities and inabilities. Take for example a situation of these two kids. One is
gifted with an interest in academics while the other one is not. The one who is not academically
competent should be given the much needed attention in order for the child to discover his own
unique forte. It is therefore wrong to judge a kid by his or her inability to deliver good academic
results without first assessing the areas in which he or she is academically struggling.

A question exists as to when we know if something is unjust or unfair especially in the

area of business. Most of the time, it is as hard to detect injustice as to prevent such from
occurring. That can happen in an unhealthy working environment or in a corrupt industry. Thus,
it is important to establish company rules and policies in the context of justice and security.
Employee and other work manuals must be written in the manner which is understood by all
even those considered as rank-and-file employees.

There are three kinds of justice which the author discussed, namely, distributive justice,
compensatory justice, and punitive justice. Distributive justice means that there is a just or fair
distribution of benefits and burdens. This kind is built with either of the following concepts:
equality, capitalism, and equity. Justice that is based on equality is pondered with the idea that
every person should be given the same share of societys benefits and burdens as everyone else.
Its premise lies on the belief that all persons are equal in some fundamental respect, and that all
the goods of society should be distributed in equal portions to all.

Justice based on capitalism provides that benefits are to be distributed based on the
contribution of individuals. The assumption is that the members of society are not really equal as
far as capacities are concerned. Some contribute more than others. In other words, those who
perform more should get more and those who perform less should get less. The issue here is the
case wherein a member cannot really contribute enough due to their limitations and
incapability. It would be unjust to disregard the needs of such member.

Justice based on equity, on the other hand, stands on the ground that the distribution of
burdens should be based on the needs of the individual and the distribution of burdens based on
the individuals abilities. The very concept governing equity is the common good. We do
acknowledge that we are both similar and different in some ways. In terms of needs, other
members of the society might need more medical assistance than others or some might need
more attention to skills development rather than the academic areas of improvement.

Compensatory justice refers to the reparation for a wrong committed or the restoration
of loss of property as a consequence of a wrong committed. This is employed in cases wherein a
person is unjustly wronged by others. The matter is on how to compensate the injured for all the
loss suffered. But before compensating such injured party, the following conditions must first be
met: (1) the action that caused the injury should be wrong or negligent; (2) the action of the
person is the real cause of the injury; and (3) the person acted voluntarily and consciously.

Retributive or punitive justice, on one side, refers to the just or fair way of determining
blame or punishment for the wrong committed. The same way as the compensatory justice
requires certain conditions to be met first, punitive justice also necessitates that the following
must occur in order for the punishment to be just or fair: (1) that the person who committed the
wrongdoing knowingly and voluntarily did the wrong act; (2) there must be certainty that the
person accused of the wrongdoing really committed the act beyond reasonable doubt; and (3)
the punishment that should be met must be consistent and proportioned to the wrong
committed.

Basically, the concept of justice becomes relative to the situation at hand. Thus, it is
essential to know how to properly judge something to be right or wrong, most especially if the
matter concerned is the violation of the human rights. We must always place the highest
importance on human dignity and to give emphasis that justice must be served to those who
really yearn for and deserve it.

To wrap things up, Martin Luther King, Jr. reminds us about the very essence of justice
and fairness in the following excerpt from Strength to Love:

Returning hate for hate multiplies hate, adding deeper darkness to a night already
devoid of stars. Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out
hate, only love can do that.

end of paper