INTRODUCTION

A fundamental feature of human life is that we live in a society because no human being
is self sufficient. Just as Aristotle would say that it is only a beast or a god that would live outside
the society because of self sufficiency. When humans are separated from the values of law and
justice, they become the worse of all animals. The part of philosophy that deals with and
examines these societies founded by men and the ways they should function is the socio-political
philosophy. eferencing from the etymology of the words that made up this discipline of
philosophy, the word social derives from a !atin word socius which means companion or
associate, while the term political derives from a "ree# word Polis which means a city state.
The tas# of socio-political philosophy is to critically examine and evaluate the social and
political beliefs of man$s society. %t is concerned with the basic factual &uestions about human
nature and society. 'ocio-political philosophy is normative as a discipline and not descriptive. %t
describes ideologies that operate within the polis and society. %t includes setting up of norms or
ideal standards for society and government. %t provides us with cases and what we ought to do in
the political terrain.
(olitical philosophy provides man with norms, and political values li#e e&uality, justice
liberty, freedom, and other political and social orders. )n the contrary morals and politics should
be #ept separate because the re&uirements for the national interest necessarily may be different
from moral interpersonal relationships.
The focus of this term paper is to examine the relationship between liberty, e&uality, and
justice if they are actually related in the real sense of the word as part of the values provided to
man by socio-political philosophy. There is need and it would be of a great help if before %
proceed to the main interest of this wor#, ma#e a conceptual clarification of terms as they are
used with regards to this wor#.
CONCEPTUAL CLARIFICATION
Terms needs to be conceptuali*ed as they are used with regards to this paper wor#. Terms
li#e relationship, liberty, e&uality, and justice.
RELATIONSHIP
elationship is a way in which two or more things are connected. elationship as used
and as is to be understood in this wor#, referencing from the dictionary meaning of the word,
connotes or presupposes the way in which the three political values, liberty, e&uality and justice
are connected to each other.
LIBERTY
This is a freedom to live as one chooses without too many restrictions from government
or authorities. %t is formally described as absence of restraint. The liberty of one individual does
not endanger the liberty of others. !iberty is the legal right and freedom to do something. A #ey
and fundamental &uestion here is the extent to which government may legitimately restrict the
liberties of individuals. The &uestion of liberty is closely connected with the &uestion of
individual rights. !iberty cannot be restricted unless the restriction can be justified on the
grounds of promoting the well being of the greater number.
THE NATURE OF LIBERTY
!iberty is a &uality of man. +an is distinguished from other living beings, man demands
freedom and sets up institutions to secure it. The problem of liberty involves the adjustment of
claims between individuals and the society.
EQUALITY
This is the act of being ta#en to be of the same standards in right, status, advantages etc.
the &uality can be fre&uently contrasted with e&uity. -&uality is a fundamental presumption of
liberal political and moral theory and it is rooted in the idea that since each individual is regarded
as being of e&ual moral worth, they are entitled to the same rights and respect. The view of e&ual
moral rights originally is coming from the liberal classical claims that all individuals are
endowed with natural rights, which they possess by virtue of being human.
.
%t is a prominent idea
of the present day world.
The principle of e&uality is multi-dimensional, it can be applied to different aspects of the
social life. This principle was first initiated as a demand for legal e&uality, e&ual grant of legal
status to the individuals of the society disregarding their capacities and other differences.
(olitical e&uality implies an e&ual political right for citi*ens.
/
-&uality as a term is descriptive not prescriptive. The notion of e&uality in the abstract
sense is compatible with the idea that because people differ in certain ways, they ought to be
treated differently. -&uity is derived from the principle of natural justice rather than from the
letter or the spirit of law.
0
The modern idea of e&uity is derived from the theory of rights.
JUSTICE
This is the legal system used to punish people who have committed crimes, the fair
treatment of people. Justice is a complex concept, to refer to something as just is to express
approval of it as being right in a specific way. %t is used both of law and of social morality.
Justice is regarded as a concept concerned with the order of the society as a whole, it is also an
expression of the right of individuals in contrast to the claims of general social order. The
concept of justice is used to cover the whole field of principles and procedures that ought to be
followed.
1
Justice is the foundation of social morality.
Justice is the first virtue of social institutions, as truth is of systems of thought. -ach
person possesses an inviolability founded on justice that even the welfare of society as a whole
cannot over-ride. 2or this reason justice denies that the loss of freedom for some is made right by
a greater good shared by others. %t does not follow that the sacrifices imposed on a few are
outweighed by the larger sum of advantages enjoyed by many.
1Maureen Ramsay. Whats wrong with liberalism, continuum, the tower building, 11 York road, London,
New York. 1997. pg 7
! ". # $auba. An introduction to political theory 4
th
edition, Macmillan %ndia limited, New &elhi. !''(.
pg((9
( %bid. pg !)(
) &.&. Raphel. Problem of political philosophy, #all Mall press limited, *ong +ong. 197'. pg1,
% propose to discuss the relationship between liberty, e&uality and justice in the light of
what % assume and believe to be the end of man$s political activity.
THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN LIBERTY, EQUALITY AND JUSTICE.
+y concern is to pay special attention to the relationship between the institutional
arrangements of the basic structure of society, and the ways in which the aims are to respect the
values of liberty, justice and e&uality. The principles and value of liberty, e&uality and justice are
closely related to each other, they complement each other on the basis of function, when there is
difficulty or complication in the understanding of one, the other value can suffice and cover up.
!iberty is a principle that stipulates freedom for individuals in the society but in order for one$s
liberty not to be a threat to the other, the principle of e&uality is necessarily needed to insure that
liberty for one does not deny the liberty of the other. To complete the combination of the
principles, all needs to be tied together and justified under the bond of justice, this is where the
relationship of the formal two values are merged with that of the principle and value of justice.
)n the other hand, justice is ensured by the principle and value of e&uality under a common basis
of liberty, liberty that would not connote denial for the other$s right to liberty. -&uality as a value
is accomplished and manifested under the value of justice. This is to ensure that the value and
e&ual rights of individual must not be exclusive but rather inclusive, a single individual of the
society must not be excluded from benefiting from the value of e&uality.
Justice in a sense is the settlement of individual claims and allocation of benefits among
the members of the society and to ensure a successful and well established allocation without
complaints and conflicts, the value of e&uality must be truly and strictly observed and followed
to ensure that no one in the society is being given priority over the other, no individual in the
society must be seen as being inferior or superior to the other. %n a government, liberty, e&uality
and justice are re&uired, all in its maximum, to provide an average and fair democratic society,
they ensure a successful wor#ing of democracy. !iberty is most re&uired to transform the will
and opinion of the people into public policies and decisions. The principle of justice and e&uality
e&ually helps to represent the minority group of the society.
)n the political conception, sovereign states are not merely instruments for reali*ing the
pre-institutional value of justice among human beings. %nstead, their existence is precisely what
gives the value of justice its application, by putting the fellow citi*ens of a sovereign state into a
relation that they do not have with the rest of humanity, an institutional relation which must then
be evaluated by the special standards of fairness and e&uality that fills out the content of justice.
Justice, according to John awls, demands fairness to persons, conceived of as free and e&ual.
(art of the first principle in his conception of justice as fairness is a re&uirement of political
equality, which presents the implications of this conception of justice for the organi*ation of the
political process including voting rights, and rules for organi*ing elections and aggregating
votes.

!iberty and e&uality as principles and values are enlisted in a society 3democratic4 to
support the masses. -&uity too# its root from the principle of natural justice, the principle of
e&uality comprises the foundation of justice, and the struggle for liberty is always triggered by a
philosophy of e&uality. The values of liberty and e&uality are both promoted by democracy.
5emocracy embraces the positive conception of liberty in which the term is seen as the condition
where individuals are given the wherewithal to reali*e their human developmental powers.
-&uality in the other hand is seen as a condition where all classes are abolished and in which
individuals own properties in common.
According to -rnest 6ar#er$s principles of social and political theory of .78., justice
represents a synthesis of the principle of liberty, e&uality and fraternity. The values functions
alongside each other, there is a balance between the values. Justice is the connection which
brings these values together and an integral part of a whole. %t reconciles their conflicts and
contradictions and gives them the shape of universal principles of governance.
Justice is the powering force of the remaining two values, e&uality and liberty. They are
held in high esteem because they are manifested in justice. Justice is the model to which the
goals of all these values conform and are focused. Justice recogni*es the dignity of the human
person and his nature. The rational nature of man dignifies him. %ndividuals are 9ends-in-itself
and not means to an end$. %n a just society the liberties of e&ual citi*enship are ta#en as settled,
the rights secured by justice are not subject to political bargaining or to the calculus of social
interests.
8
The three principles of justice are based on e&uality and liberty. The value of justice
rests on liberty, this is a patterned principle of justice.
-ohn Rawls. A Theory of Justice, re.. ed. /0ambridge, Mass.1 *ar.ard 2ni.ersity #ress, 19993, p. !,.
:o individual for the value and very fact of the reality of justice must be treated as
superior or inferior to another and this is the converging point of the two values of justice and
e&uality. These are a part of their relationship. %ndividuals needs and deserve e&ual freedom of
personal development in their own rights to prove their worth to the society. The principle of
e&uality is not the final principle of justice. The principle of liberty ceases to conform to that of
justice until the benefit of liberty is e&ually extended. !iberty as the absence of restraint cannot
be a universal principle until the principle of e&uality &ualifies them. %n liberty one is not meant
to be a threat to the other.
estraint on liberty can only be upheld on the condition of being imposed for the interest
of justice and e&uality. The principle of liberty is &ualified by the principle of e&uality and the
principle of e&uality is &ualified by the principle of justice. %t cannot be said that one has a
general right to liberty and conse&uently does not have a fundamental right to e&uality of any
interesting #ind. There cannot be an assumption of conflict between the values. ights to
e&uality that are in fact proposed are positive rights, which entail that some people may be
compelled to become e&ual or more nearly e&ual with others in the respect in which e&uality is
proclaimed and this is justice extended. ights to e&uality are compatible with rights to liberty.
The relationship between liberty and e&uality is crucial to an ade&uate understanding of
democracy. !iberty should be grounded on the value of justice and e&uality.
%t is significant that the struggle for liberty is always triggered or informed by a
philosophy based on e&uality. When the oppressed charges against their oppressors, a peasant
revolt or a national struggle for independence, they challenge and &uestion the superiority of the
oppressors, demanding their rights to e&uality and justice on the universal principle of human
justice and liberty. The 2rench revolution of .;<7 fought for liberty and e&uality. !iberty,
coupled with e&uality, describes the conditions of human emancipation. They constitute the voice
of the masses being oppressed, the voice against injustice and the voice for a change in social
conditions that are not fair.
=
!iberty and e&uality are complementary principles. %t is essential to
8 *erbert 4piegelberg, 56 &e7ense o7 *uman 89uality.5 #hilosophical Re.iew, .ol. ,( /19))3, pp.1'1,
11(:1!(; and &.&. Raphael, 5-ustice and Liberty,5 #roceedings o7 the 6ristotelian 4ociety, .ol. ,1/19,':
19,13, pp. 1<77.
". # $auba. An introduction to political theory 4
th
edition, Macmillan %ndia limited, New &elhi. !''(.
pg((1
understand the nature and essence of e&uality in order to determine its established relationship
with the principle of liberty and justice.
!iberty as a principle is complementary to e&uality as a principle as well. %f freedom for
one denies freedom for the other in turn, it would be a negation of liberty as a universal principle.
The view of liberty and e&uality as being complementary implies the imposition of a reasonable
restraint to freedom 3liberty4 so that the freedom of one does not obstruct similar and e&ual
freedom for the other. %n other words, the demand for substantive freedom stipulates the
provision of substantive e&uality. This will result in a reduction of vast socio-economic
disparities. Those on the side of maintaining these disparities try to hide the true relationship
between liberty, e&uality and justice. The principle of e&uality radically demands a change in the
social arrangements that give undue control to a particular section of the society over the life of
others.
;
!iberty and e&uality comprises the foundation of a just social order. %n historical
perspective, the need for liberty was greatly supported by the idea of e&uality. The demand for
liberty implies the abolition of special privileges of certain groups, hence e&uality of all citi*ens
in every aspect.
<
awls$ first principle of justice covers liberty, and he argues that, once a certain level of
material well-being is secured, it should always ta#e priority over the second principle regarding
distributive justice. !iberty is more important than the distribution of social and economic
ine&ualities.
7
awls rejects the idea of rights prior to the principles of justice. (rinciples of justice
assign rights 3and duties, benefits and burdens4, so people can only ma#e a right claim once the
principles of justice are in place. We could object that justice is served when people receive what
they have a right to. We could argue, for instance, that people have a right to what they need or
deserve. A different theory, which bases justice on rights and liberty, is that of obert :o*ic#.
The relationship between e&uality and liberty is crucial to an ade&uate understanding of
justice. We need to consider justice beyond material distribution and e&ual rights. Justice-as
fairness, understood only as the application of the institutional principles, cannot fully establish
7 %bid. pg ()
< %bid pg()9
9 Rawls and No=ick on >ustice.>ornal paper. Routledge.
social e&uality. The principle of liberty will not conform to the principle of justice until the
benefit of liberty is e&ually extended to each individual in the society. The principle of justice
postulates not merely formal liberty and e&uality, but a transformation of those social conditions
which obstruct the enjoyment of freedom and e&uality by ordinary men and women.
.>
Any
limitation in the right of any section to e&uality can only be upheld when it is duly proved that it
is discrimination in favour of the wea#er section in the interests of justice.
?uoting from Aristotle, @justice consists in treating e&uals e&ually and une&ual une&ually.
Those who are e&ual as citi*ens of a state may thin# they are entitled to e&ual power, prestige
and wealth, but when these privileges are denied them, they will have a feeling of deprivation
and a sense of injustice. (ursuit for justice is a matter of procedure, its objective is to promote
freedom. %t should provide for maximum opportunity to each individual to serve hisAher self-
interest according to hisAher own #nowledge and wisdom.
elationship of liberty and e&uality to democracy in the light of what is assume and also
believe to be the end of man$s political activity may be hard to point out, 6ut liberty and e&uality
are not abstract values, though it does not follow that they are empirically measurable. !iberty
and e&uality cannot be appraised, but must be regarded as an ethical imperative.
..
%t is only as
@ethical imperativesB that e&uality and liberty can have an influence on the conduct of human
life. Without these ethical imperativesB it may be extremely difficult if not altogether impossible
to explain social changes. -&uality is not similarity or sameness, nor is liberty license or
irresponsibility.
./
They must be loo#ed at as values whose content is continually replenished by
relevant substance reflecting the degree of the moral awareness of man. :either e&uality nor
liberty should mean the absence of ine&ualities or constraint.
CONCLUSION
1' ". # $auba. An introduction to political theory 4
th
edition, Macmillan %ndia limited, New &elhi. !''(.
pg(7).
.. ?. 8rnest -ohnson, @Ahe 0oncept o7 *uman 89uality,B Aspects of Human Freedom, 6 symposium by
the 0on7erence on 4cience, #hilosophy, and Religion, Col. 1, /New York1 *arper, 19,3, p. !,.
1! Labib Duwiyya Yamak, iberty, !"uality, and #emocracy$ Winter %&'()'%$
At the outset, % suggested that the &uestion of the relationship between liberty and
e&uality and justice sounded somewhat biased against extreme answers. 6ut in the end, we are
left with what some will without doubt claim to be an extreme answer. There is a primary
relationship between the values but my concern is how much of these relationship have we got to
enforce. The relationship between the values is directly connected with the concerns of
individual rights because the expression of individuality is very vital to society, and so the
society must allow its members to exercise their individuality by doing whatever they desire, as
long as their actions can be justified under the values of e&uality, liberty and justice.
As it relates to administration, the principles of the three values, justice, e&uality and
liberty needs to be properly enforced to ensure a conducive societal atmosphere since it is
fundamentally stated that human beings live in the society for the very fact that no one is self
sufficient. The values discussed in this paper plays a great role in relationship with themselves to
help man achieve his aim of being in the society, as well as helping him and providing him with
re&uirements to ma#e up to his self insufficiency.
REFERENCE
1. 5.5. aphael. Problem of political philosophy, (all +all press limited, Cong Dong.
.7;>.
!. 2. -rnest Johnson, @The Concept of Human Equality,B Aspects of Human Freedom, A
symposium by the Eonference on 'cience, (hilosophy, and eligion, Fol. .8 3:ew Gor#H
Carper, .78=4.
(. Cerbert 'piegel berg, IA Defense of Human Equality. Philosophical !e"ie#, vol. 80
3.7114, pp..>., ..0-./0, and 5.5. aphael, IJustice and !iberty,I (roceedings of the
Aristotelian 'ociety, vol. 8.3.78>-.78.4.
). John awls. A Theory of $ustice, rev. ed. 3Eambridge, +ass.H Carvard Jniversity (ress,
.7774.
,. !abib Kuwiyya Gama#, %iberty, Equality, and Democracy. &inter '()*+)'
. +aureen amsay. &hat,s #rong #ith liberalism, continuum, the tower building, .. Gor#
road, !ondon, :ew Gor#. .77;.
7. ). ( "auba. An introduction to political theory - edition, +acmillan %ndia limited, :ew
5elhi. />>0.
<. awls and :o*ic# on justice. Journal paper. outledge