When Justice Bows to Law: Courts, Conscience, and the Burden of Unjust Laws."The Paradox of Law and Justice. Volume I

By P.L. Osakwe

■ INTRODUCTION

Every society needs law. Without law, we would live in chaos, no rules, no order, no protection. Yet, while law promises order, justice promises fairness. And this is where a deep paradox emerges: what happens when the law, made to protect, becomes a tool of injustice?
Courts, as guardians of the law, face this dilemma every day. They are sworn to uphold the law, but they are also trusted to deliver justice. The trouble is that the two do not always meet. Sometimes the black-and-white text of the law collides with the living, breathing demands of justice.
This paradox, the tension between law and justice, is one of the oldest struggles in human history.

■ Law as Order.
At its core, law is about structure. It is the framework by which society organizes itself. Law defines what is allowed, what is forbidden, and what happens when rules are broken. In this sense, law is neutral; it applies to everyone.

But neutrality is not the same as fairness. A law may be clear and universally binding, yet still strike unfairly at the vulnerable. For example, a tax law that applies equally to the rich and poor may still crush the poor far more than it affects the wealthy. In the eyes of the law, it is equal. In the eyes of justice, it is not.
Thus, law as order gives predictability, but not always fairness.

■ Justice as Fairness.
Justice, on the other hand, is less about rules and more about values. It is about dignity, equity, and humanity. Justice asks not only, “Is this the law?” but also, “Is this right?”
The problem is that justice is harder to define. What feels just to one person may feel unjust to another. Unlike law, which is written and codified, justice is moral, ethical, and often subjective.
Yet, societies look to courts not only for the application of statutes but also for the promise of fairness. That is why judges are called “Justices” in many systems. They are expected to be more than clerks of the law. They are expected to be custodians of fairness.

■ When the Two Collide.
The paradox becomes stark when law and justice move in opposite directions. Imagine a judge who must enforce a statute that clearly applies to the case before them, but whose effect is cruel, harsh, or oppressive. Should that judge follow the letter of the law, or the spirit of justice?
Most legal systems, including ours, bind judges to the law. The law is supreme, not personal conscience. A judge who refuses to apply a statute risks being accused of bias, activism, or even misconduct. Yet, a judge who blindly enforces an unjust law risks betraying the very idea of justice that gives the court its moral authority.
This is the paradox at the heart of judicial duty.

■ Why Unjust Laws Exist.
If law is supposed to reflect justice, why do unjust laws exist at all? The reasons are many:
1. Politics over principle: Legislatures sometimes pass laws to serve the interests of the powerful, not the needs of the people.
2. Rigidity of rules: A law written in one era may become unfair in another as society evolves.
3. Over-generalisation: Laws treat everyone the same, but people’s situations are never truly the same.
4. Errors and oversight: Lawmakers are human; they make mistakes.
Thus, the legal system often produces rules that, while valid, are not always fair.

■ The Burden on Courts.
This reality places a heavy burden on courts. Judges are expected to deliver justice, but their hands are often tied by what legislatures enact and higher courts interpret.
A judge cannot simply strike down a law because they feel it is unjust. They must look to the Constitution or guiding principles of interpretation. This means that sometimes, courts end up enforcing laws that they know weigh unfairly on citizens.
This does not make judges villains. It makes them human actors trapped within the machinery of legality. But it also raises the moral question: what is the point of a court of law, if it cannot be a court of justice?

■ A Living Question
The paradox of law and justice is not an abstract debate for philosophers. It is a living question for every citizen who comes before a court, every lawyer who pleads a case, and every judge who delivers a verdict.
Do we want courts that apply laws mechanically, regardless of fairness? Or do we want courts that seek justice, even when it means stretching the boundaries of the law?
Neither path is without danger. Blind legality leads to oppression; unchecked conscience leads to chaos. The challenge of every legal system is finding the balance.

■ Conclusion: A Question for Our Time.
The tension between law and justice will never fully disappear. It is the price of living in societies governed by rules, but inhabited by human beings. Yet, this paradox forces us to ask hard questions:
1. Should courts be content with being enforcers of law, or must they also be guardians of justice?
2. Is a law that crushes the weak still a law worth enforcing?
3. And if judges do not resist unjust laws, who will?

As we ponder these questions, one truth remains: a legal system that forgets justice soon loses its legitimacy. Law may command obedience, but only justice earns respect.