Journal of Law, Policy and Globalization www.iiste.

org
ISSN 2224-24! "Pa#er$ ISSN 2224-2%& "'nline$
(ol.2), 2!*4

*2
A Critique of John Rawls Social Justice Theory and the Fate of
Nigerias Politics in the 21stCentury and !eyond

+li,a- '.on Jo-n, P-. /.
"Senior Lecturer$
/e#art0ent of P-iloso#-y, 1ni2ersity of 1yo, P. 3. 4. *!*5, 1yo, 6.wa Ibo0 State, Nigeria
+-0ail7 eli,a-,o-n8uniuyo.edu.ng

A"stract
In t-e #resent, one of t-e 0a,or #roble0s #laguing t-e Nigerian society is t-at of social ,ustice. 6nd great
t-in.ers fro0 ti0e i00e0orial -a2e atte0#ted to discuss t-e 0eaning of and t-e need for social ,ustice in a
society li.e Nigeria. 4ut recently, a conte0#orary 60erican social and #olitical t-in.er, Jo-n 9awls, is -is
ad2ocacy for social ,ustice, is 2ery 2ocal in t-e need and e2entual for0ation of t-e social t-eory conce#t. :-us,
t-is #a#er atte0#ts to gi2e a #-iloso#-ical criti;ue of 9awls< conce#tion and t-e necessity of t-e a##lication of
-is social ,ustice t-eory in t-e Nigerian #olitical landsca#e. :-is wor. does not intend to #resent 9awls< #osition
as t-e 0ost logical, #erfect social and #olitical argu0ents in t-e consideration of social ,ustice. 4ut it intends to
#oint out so0e defects about 9awls< social ,ustice. 4ut t-e 0ain consideration s-all be on t-e need and rele2ance
of it to t-e Nigerian nation. In t-is way, it s-all effecti2ely #oint to t-e e2ils t-at can acco0#any its negligence.
#eywords$ Social Justice, Political Stability, Social =reedo0, and 9awls< :-eory.

1% &ntroduction
+2er since t-e #ublication of A Theory of Justice in *&5*, Jo-n 9awls "*&2*-2!!2$, an 60erican #-iloso#-er,
educator and a fore0ost conte0#orary social and #olitical t-in.er, -as not ceased to attract t-e ad0iration of
0any. :-is is because -e is widely regarded to -a2e wor.ed out a sound t-eory of social ,ustice wit- -is >,ustice
as fairness? #rinci#le. It is a truis0 t-at 9awls< social t-eory li.e 0ost #-iloso#-ies ca0e because of t-e
c-allenge of t-e ti0e. :-is is to say t-at in *)@, Jo-n Stuart 3ill wrote Utilitarianism to defend t-e #rinci#le of
t-e greatest #ossible result of t-e greatest nu0ber. Aowe2er, w-en Jo-n 9awls ca0e in contact wit- 3ill<s
Utilitarianism, -e read it and e;ually underscored so0e defects e0bedded in 3ill<s utilitarian #rinci#les. :-us,
9awls wrote A Theory of Justice as an attac. on 3ill<s classical utilitarianis0. In it, 9awls atte0#ts to sol2e t-e
#roble0 of social ,ustice "Jo-n, *&&&7 %$. In doing t-is, 9awls "*&5*7*5$ 0aintains t-at >0any .inds of t-ings
are said to be ,ust BC for us t-e #ri0ary ob,ect of ,ustice is t-e basic structure of t-e society?.
9awls< "*&5*74$ t-roug- -is social cu0 2eil t-eory, ardently -olds t-e belief t-at -is #-iloso#-y #ro2ides a way
of assigning rig-ts and duties in t-e basic institutions of t-e society as well as defining t-e a##ro#riate
distribution of t-e benefits and burdens of social coo#eration.

2% A 'istorical Sur(ey of the Notion of Justice
In t-is write-u#, -istorical sur2ey of t-e notion of ,ustice s-all be considered under t-ree 0a,or co0#art0ents,
na0ely7 Justice in #re-Socratic, Socratic and #ost-Socratic #eriods. :-e #robably reason for t-ese di2isions is to
enable us -a2e a clear #icture of ,ustice.
2.1 Justice in Pre-Socratic Era
:-e way we concei2e of ,ustice today is definitely not t-e sa0e way t-in.ers concei2ed it in t-e #ast. :-is
eD#lains w-y in s#ite of 6naDi0ander<s #reoccu#ation wit- cos0ology, -e saw t-ere was in,ustice in nature
w-en and w-ere2er t-e #ri0ary ele0ents "t-at is, water, eart-, fire and air$ were in conflict since by t-is conflictC
eac- ele0ent in2aded t-e do0ain of anot-er. '0oregbe "*&&*74$ obser2es t-at >t-e conflict a0ong 2arious
ele0ents was inter#reted by 6naDi0ander as an eDa0#le of in,ustice in nature.
6lt-oug- 6naDi0ander<s idea see0s fairly clear, t-e cos0ological wa2e wit- w-ic- it co0es 0a.es it at
2ariance wit- our understanding of ,ustice. 6naDi0ander was t-us concerned wit- cos0ic ,ustice. :-erefore, as
t-e concern of #-iloso#-y s-ifted fro0 cos0ological to 0an wit- t-e introduction of so#-is0, ,ustice was not
left out. In t-is 0anner, ,ustice -ad to 0o2e fro0 being a cos0ological concern to beco0ing an et-ical issue.
:-is c-ange is so ob2ious t-at w-ene2er one 0entions >,ustice? today, we no longer t-in. of fire, eart-, water
and air as 6naDi0ander would. E-at t-is #ortends is t-at e2eryone, bot- indi2idually and institutionally, tends
to searc- out if -eFs-e is in line wit- ,ustice, es#ecially in t-e #olitical a0bience.
6not-er ancient t-in.er, Aeraclitus, was fa0ous in anti;uity for -is doctrine t-at e2eryt-ing is in a
state of fluD. Aeraclitus declares7 >we 0ust .now t-at war is co00on to all and strife is ,ustice? "9ussell,
*&5&7@!$. :-at war is co00on to all cannot be denied. :-e #re2alence of ar0ed -ostilities bot- in de2elo#ed
and de2elo#ing nations attests to t-is fact. :-is -owe2er does not suggest in any way t-at we s-ould fold our
-ands in 2ain satisfaction wit- t-e state of affairs. 4ut can strife w-ic- begets -ate, destruction and e2en deat- be
said to be coter0inous wit- or be said to be definiti2e of ,usticeG It see0s 0ore reasonable to belie2e t-e
Journal of Law, Policy and Globalization www.iiste.org
ISSN 2224-24! "Pa#er$ ISSN 2224-2%& "'nline$
(ol.2), 2!*4

*
o##osite of Aeraclitus< 2iew. :-at is, t-at strife is itself un,ust and can lead to 0ore in,ustice suc- as ar0ed
-ostilities and blood lettings if not ter0inated. :-is is w-y e2en wit- t-e consolation t-at our understanding of
,ustice is 0ar.edly different fro0 t-at of t-e ancients, one still wonders on w-at would be t-e reasoning be-ind
suc- a strange, #aradoDical assertion as >strife is ,ustice?. Ha2endis- "*&@474$ writes of Aeraclitus t-at >-e wrote
in an obscure oracular style, full of #uns and obli;ue allusions?. It was t-ese c-aracteristics of -is wor. t-at
earned Aeraclitus t-e traditional na0e of t-e >dar. #-iloso#-er? "'wens, *&%&742$. :-rasy0arcus is Plato<s
aut-orial 2oice in The Republic to re#resent an o#inion, #o#ular at t-at ti0e in Greece. 6ccording to 3agill
"*&&!7%)$, :-rasy0arcus >re#resents a #osition w-ic- -as since been stated 0any ti0es in w-ic- ,ustice is
#resented as t-e ad2antage or interest of t-e stronger #arty?.
In t-is case, ,ustice does not #ayC it is only t-e wea. and si0#letons w-o #ractice it. 't-erwise, one
would -a2e assu0ed t-at :-rasy0arcus was greatly angered by -is obser2ation t-at a citizen<s rig-t to a t-ing
li.e freedo0 of 0o2e0ent 0ust not be eD#ressed w-en t-e agents of t-e state "t-e stronger in t-is case$ wanted
to -a2e t-eir rig-t of way. 4ut t-is assu0#tion would be 2itiated once a 0an is re0inded t-at so#-is0, a
#-iloso#-y w-ic- :-rasy0arcus belonged to clai0ed it could argue to 0a.e blac. loo. li.e w-ite. Aence,
:-rasy0arcus< 2iew beco0es sus#ected as it falls into t-e category of suc- atte0#ted argu0ents to 0a.e w-ite
loo. li.e blac.G

2.2 Justice in Socratic Era
Plato in The Republic, atte0#ts to define ,ustice and t-e conditions for its realization bot- in t-e indi2idual and
in t-e state. Justice according to Plato in2ol2es a correct relations-i# of t-e t-ree #arts of t-e indi2idual<s soul,
na0ely7 t-e rational, s#irited and a##etiti2e #arts. Since t-e state is t-e indi2idual writ large, it is to be stratified
along t-e lines of t-e guardians, auDiliaries and artisans. =or t-e society to be ,ust, t-e guardians -a2e to rule. =or
9ussell "*&5&7*2&$, >in Plato<s conce#tion, ,ustice consists in e2erybody doing -is own wor. and not being a
busy body?. +tu., after a detailed eDa0ination of Plato, writes t-at >if t-e re#ublic -ad been anyt-ing ot-er t-an
a uto#ia, it would -a2e colla#sed in no ti0e. =or eit-er t-e soldiers would -a2e rebelled and snatc-ed at t-e
o##ortunity to rule and sa2our t-e tra##ings of #owerC or t-e 2ast ar0ies of wor.0en or #roducers would -a2e
.ic.ed against t-eir assigned lot in lifeC or t-e >golden? rulers would -a2e grabbed at real gold and sil2er and so
bro.en t-e 0yt-? "+tu., 2!!!7*&$.
It is on t-is note t-at we 0o2e on to eDa0ining 6ristotle<s notion of ,ustice as contained in -is
ichomechean Ethics. 'ne will readily find a co00on ground wit- 6ristotle w-en -e, on seeing t-at ,ustice is a
0oral 2irtue t-at enco0#asses all ot-er 2irtues, declares t-at in ,ustice, e2ery 2irtue is su00ed u#, t-at is, ,ustice
is t-e constellation of all 2irtues. Eit- regards to anyt-ing t-at is to be distributed, 6ristotle "*&@27$ declares
t-at >if #ersons are not e;ual, t-eir s-ares will not be e;ual?. :-is 0eans t-at in t-e distribution of state goods
and social benefits, ,ustice is ac-ie2ed by gi2ing a 0an w-at -e deser2es. 9ussell "*&5&7*)@$ notes t-at for
6ristotle, ,ustice of a 0aster or a fat-er is a different t-ing fro0 t-at of a citizen or a son, for a sla2e is a #ro#erty
and t-ere can be no in,ustice to one<s #ro#erty. :-is 0eans t-at for 6ristotle, it is ,ust t-at certain 0en suc- as
sla2es s-ould be used as 0eans to 2arious ends as t-eir owners 0ay #lease. :-e ;uestion t-en is7 can a sla2e
-olding society 2alidly clai0 to be ,ust es#ecially w-en ser2itude or sla2ery often co0es wit- t-e
de-u0anization of sla2esG Sla2e -olders seldo0 treat sla2es as -u0an beings I beings to w-o0 ,ustice 0ust
a##ly. In t-e relations-i# of t-e 0aster and t-e sla2e, suc- 2alues as e;uality of rig-ts and o##ortunities, do not
co0e in. it is rat-er sur#rising t-at t-e teac-er of an e0#ire builder s-ould atte0#t a #-iloso#-ical ,ustification of
sla2ery.
6ristotle could not esca#e w-at egalitarian t-eorists call >t-e indeD #roble0?, w-ic- states t-e #ro#er
indeD for deter0ining e;uals fro0 une;ual. 'r #ut it 0ore r-etorically7 w-at s-ould constitute desert, birt-,
wealt- or wisdo0G 6ristotle<s inability to state in clear ter0s w-at s-ould constitute desert 0a.es +tu. "2!!!7*&$
to conclude t-at -e did not fair better in -is treat0ent of social ,ustice t-an did Plato.

2.! Justice in Post-Socratic Era
It is well .nown to #-iloso#-ers t-at se;uel to t-e Socratic era, was t-e #eriod w-en s.e#ticis0 and cynicis0
flouris-ed. Haneades of Hyrene "2*4 I *2& 4H$, is said to -a2e deli2ered lectures in 9o0e in w-ic- -e
eD#ounded t-e 2iews of 6ristotle and Plato on social ,ustice. In -is second series of lectures, -e refuted all t-at
-e taug-t in t-e first wit- #articular sneer at Plato<s 2iew t-at t-e #er#etrator of in,ustice in,ures -i0self 0ore
t-an t-e 2icti0. Haneades t-unders7 w-at would you do if you were returning fro0 a battle in w-ic- you lost
your -orse but luc.ily you find a wounded co0rade on a -orseG If you were sensible, Haneades re#lies, you
would drag -i0 off and seize -is -orse w-ate2er ,ustice 0ig-t ordain. =or Haneades, great States -ad beco0e
great by un,ust aggressions against t-eir wea.er neig-bours "9ussell, *&5&724%$. Haneades< 2iew on ,ustice is
ty#ical of a s.e#tic. It carries wit- it t-e s#irit of t-e era w-ic- was c-aracterized by wars of con;uests. 4ut t-en,
t-e ;uestion of world #eace and international ,ustice did not arise.
:-o0as Aobbes rig-tly falls under t-e 0odern era of #-iloso#-y. Ae restricts -is conce#tion of ,ustice
Journal of Law, Policy and Globalization www.iiste.org
ISSN 2224-24! "Pa#er$ ISSN 2224-2%& "'nline$
(ol.2), 2!*4

*4
to t-e .ee#ing of contracts regarding #ro#erty. Ae belie2es t-at t-e law of nature regarding .ee#ing of contracts
is t-e >fountain and origin of ,ustice?. Justice is t-e .ee#ing of contract w-ile in,ustice is t-e brea.ing of it. In
fact, in,ustice is not-ing ot-er t-an t-e non-ad-erence to a contract "Aobbes, *&&*7*%@$. =or Aobbes, t-e
so2ereign s-ould 0a.e co00itting of in,ustice w-ic- is t-e brea.ing of a contract 0ore #ainful t-an to li2e
,ustly w-ic- t-e .ee#ing is of contracts "3agil, *&&!724$. 6ccording to +tu. "2!!!72*$, >Aobbes did not a##ear
to realize t-at e2en in dealing wit- w-at is one<s own, -e was touc-ing on funda0ental issues w-ic- go beyond
eDternal #ro#erties, for instance, life itself?. Aow can we substantiate t-isG H-ristian de2otees are fa0iliar wit-
t-e biblical story of t-e succession of e2ents t-at led to t-e deat- of Jo-n t-e 4a#tist, w-ic- is to -a2e actually
ta.en #lace around 2 6/. :-e story of -ow a .ing 0ade a co2enant to gi2e anyt-ing e2en u# to -alf of -is
.ingdo0 to -is daug-ter w-o #leased -i0 so 0uc-C and -ow -e was bound to .ee# t-is co2enant e2en w-en it
re;uired t-e -ead of a 0an in a tray "The "oly #ible$ %atthe& 1'$1-12(. :o t-is case, we 0ay as. Aobbes, w-o
do we bla0e7 t-e .ing for .ee#ing -is co2enant or t-e little girl for t-e ,ust act of obedience to -er 0ot-erC or t-e
eDecutioner for legiti0ately carrying out t-e order of t-e JingG :-ese successions of see0ingly ,ust acts led to
suc- an ob2iously o2erw-el0ing in,ustice as t-e .illing of a 0an. 'b2iously, t-e .ing was wrong in t-e sense of
not treating Jo-n as t-e end but rat-er, -e treated t-e co2enant as t-e end to w-ic- Jo-n<s life was t-e 0eans.
Justice in its Gree. inter#retation 0eans rig-teousness or rig-tness. Since -u0an beings are not
rig-teous all t-e ti0e, t-e need arises to safeguard and regulate 0an in -is relations-i# wit- fellow 0en. :-us,
safeguarding can rig-tly be seen as t-e #rinci#le of social ,ustice. 4anu "2!!%7$ sees social ,ustice as >a set of
di2ision of social ad2antages and for underwriting a consensus as to t-e #ro#er distributi2e s-ares?. Social
,ustice is a #olitical 2olatile conce#t, o#en to 0any inter#retations because t-eorists -a2e different conce#tions of
w-at >a fair treat0ent? or a >,ustice s-are? s-ould 0ean. Let us eDa0ine 9awls< social ,ustice w-ic- is based on
-is ,ustice of fairness #rinci#le.

)% Rawls Princi*le of Social Justice
9awls< social ,ustice is a de2iation fro0 t-e way Plato and 6ristotle concei2ed it. 9awls< concern is wit- -ow
social goods are distributed not according to 0erit, but by e;uality. 9awls< first concern, t-erefore, is wit- t-e
way t-e 0a,or social institutions generate and accordingly circulate funda0ental rig-ts and duties. Aence, t-e
basic t-rust of t-e criterion of need is t-at t-e de0ands and benefits ta.e cognizance of t-e needs of t-e #eo#le.
6ccordingly, 9awls states t-at t-e 0a,or institutions 0ean 2arious #olitical associations, constitutions
and t-e socio-econo0ic #rogra00es of t-e state. 9awls belie2es t-at t-ese socio-#olitical and econo0ic
institutions can deter0ine t-e di2isions of ad2antages and social integration of t-e #eo#le in t-e state. Ae goes on
to indicate t-at t-ese institutions #lay 2ital role in s-a#ing t-e -o#es, a0bitions, life-style, as#irations and t-e
rig-ts and duties of 0en in any gi2en state. E-at 9awls understands by social ,ustice is t-at it is t-e totality of
0a,or socio-econo0ic structures as well as t-e constitution of t-e #eo#le "Jo-n, 2!!&7%4$.

+% Rawls Social Contract
=or 9awls to successfully for0ulate -is social ,ustice, -e, li.e all social contractarians, #ro#oses -is own 2ersion
of t-e social contract. Ais social contract t-eory is in o##osition to intuitionis0 and utilitarianis0. In de2elo#ing
-is t-eory, 9awls #osits two basic #rinci#les7 t-e first #rinci#le is t-at of indi2iduals< rig-t to as 0uc- liberty as
is co0#atible wit- t-e liberty of ot-ers. In -is own words, 9awls "*&5*72*%$ indicates t-at t-e first #rinci#le is
t-at w-ic- >+ac- #erson is to -a2e e;ual rig-ts to t-e 0ost eDtensi2e total syste0 wit- a si0ilar syste0 of liberty
for all?.
9awls< second #rinci#le occu#ies itself wit- t-e social and econo0ic ine;ualities w-ic- are to be
deter0ined for e2eryone<s ad2antage and under conditions of e;ual o##ortunity. Ae declares as follows7 >Social
and econo0ic ine;ualities are to be arranged so t-at t-ey are bot-7 "a$ to t-e greatest benefit of t-e least
ad2antaged, consistent wit- t-e ,ust sa2ing #rinci#le, and "b$ attac-ed to offices and #ositions o#en to all under
conditions of fair e;uality of o##ortunity? "9awls, *&5*72*%$.

,% The -eil Theory
In eD#atiating on t-ese #rinci#les, 9awls relies so 0uc- on t-e su#erstruction of a 0eta#-ysical situation by
w-ic- e2eryone is #laced in an original #osition be-ind -is )eil of i*norance. :-is 2eil t-eory is 2ery i0#ortant
for 9awls because it is t-e only way to ensure ,ustice and fairness in t-e #rocess of for0ing a new society. In t-e
new society about to be for0ed, 9awls creates an i0aginary situation in w-ic- all t-e #ros#ecti2e citizens are
de#ri2ed fro0 certain .nowledge about t-eir #ersonal circu0stances t-roug- t-e )eil of i*norance. :-is 0eans
no one in t-e interi0 will .now eDactly w-at -e will beco0e in t-e new society. +2erybody<s .nowledge of -is
circu0stantial role, #osition or #rofession will only be un2eiled w-en t-e tas. of deciding on a 2iable t-esis of
go2ernance -as been generally agreed u#on. :-e i0#lication is t-at no 0e0ber of t-e #ro#osed society will be
aware of -is res#onsibilities or duties until t-e #rinci#les t-at will go2ern t-e society 0ust -a2e been decided.
:-ese #rinci#les, according to 9awls, are to be c-osen by all 0e0bers of t-e society. 6nd a0ong t-e
Journal of Law, Policy and Globalization www.iiste.org
ISSN 2224-24! "Pa#er$ ISSN 2224-2%& "'nline$
(ol.2), 2!*4

*%
0e0bers-i# of t-is society are 0en and wo0en of di2erse >gifts?7 lawyers, 0edical doctors, teac-ers, far0ers,
cler.s, car#enters, dri2ers, 0ec-anics, t-e ric-, t-e #oor, t-e lazy, t-e cle2er, t-e -ardwor.ing, leaders,
#oliticians, etc since 0en 0ay be te0#ted to be biased or fa2our a #articular #rofession or role or #osition, if
anyone were to .now in ad2ance w-at -is career or role is going to be. 9awls, t-erefore, suggests t-at all 0ust
be 2eiled wit- ignorance before deciding on t-e #rinci#les. :-is 0et-od of agree0ent or selection, in 9awls<
o#inion, is to ensure fairness and e;uality in t-e society. 4y reason of t-e )eil of i*norance, e2eryone will
i0#artially c-oose t-e #rinci#les t-at would be fair and fa2ourable to all. In t-is way, no one will be afraid of
w-ate2er -a##ens to one<s #rofession afterwards. 'nce t-e decision -as been reac-ed about t-e #rinci#les of
go2ernance, 9awls states t-at t-e 2eil will t-en be unco2ered for #eo#le to .now t-eir careers and roles in t-e
new society.
9awls furt-er warns t-at once t-e 2eil is ta.en away and t-e #eo#le -a2e co0e to .now t-eir "new$
roles and #ositions in t-e new society, t-e #rinci#les cannot be a0ended or c-anged. :-at 0eans w-et-er t-e
#rinci#les of go2ernance fa2our a #articular #erson or not, e2ery #erson is duty-bound to acce#t it since -e was a
#arty to its for0ulation "Jo-n, 2!!&7%@$. It 0ust be understood t-at anot-er benefit of t-e )eil of i*norance is
t-at it gi2es so0e .ind of direction and unbiased focus to all #rofessions and #osts in t-e c-oice of t-e #rinci#les
to go2ern 0en in t-e new society. In t-is 0anner, 9awls -olds t-at t-ere will be an inward wor.ing, a .ind of
conscience, telling e2eryone to be fair in -is or -er decision. :-is issue of fairness in ,udg0ent is necessary since
one 0ay turn out to be t-e 2icti0 of o##ressi2e #rinci#les -e 0ig-t -a2e decided for.
In t-e o#ening #aragra#- of A Theory of Justice, 9awls declares t-at ,ustice is t-e first and
indis#ensable 2irtue of social institutions. :-is is because no 0atter -ow efficient or well-arranged a social
institution is, it 0ust be refor0ed or abolis-ed if it is un,ust. Ee 0ust see t-e society as a coo#erati2e 2enture for
0utual ad2antage. :-at is, 0e0bers of t-e society s-ould be seen as e;ually coo#erating wit- t-e indi2iduals for
t-e #roduction of #ri0ary social goods. :-ese social goods are rig-ts, liberties, #owers, o##ortunities, inco0e
and wealt-. :-ere arises a #roble0 of distributi2e ,ustice since indi2iduals are not indifferent wit- regards to
-ow t-e #roduct of t-eir coo#eration is to be distributed. :-e condition of fairness obtains w-en no #arty to t-e
agree0ent is at an ad2antaged #osition o2er ot-ers in furt-ering -is own interest. Suc- a fair #osition is w-at
9awls "*&5*7**$ calls >t-e original #osition? w-ic- -e wants us to understand as a -y#ot-etical condition w-ic-
re;uires us to 2isualize t-e negotiators of t-e basic ter0s of #olitical association, conducting t-eir negotiations
be-ind a )eil of i*norance+. :-at is, -a2ing no .nowledge of t-eir indi2idual life conditions suc- as talents,
intelligence, seD, race, class, religion, wealt- and conce#tion of t-e good.
Sterba "*&)&74!5$ obser2es t-at >t-e 2eil of ignorance -as t-e effect of de#ri2ing #ersons in t-e
original #osition of t-e .nowledge t-ey would need to ad2ance t-eir own s#ecial interests?. 9awls "*&5*7*2$
writes t-at >since all are si0ilarly situated and no one is able to design #rinci#les to fa2our -is #articular
condition, t-e #rinci#les of ,ustice are as a result of a fair agree0ent or bargain?. Ee 0ust ensure t-at we arri2e
at a reflecti2e e;uilibriu0 in our resultant conce#tion of ,ustice. :-is is a situation in w-ic- our intuitions about
,ustice are -ar0onized wit- our #rinci#les. :-e #arties in t-e original #osition would also agree. :-e first
#rinci#le co00only called t-e liberty #rinci#le is #rior to t-e second w-ic- is .nown as t-e difference #rinci#le.
Social goods are to be e;ually distributed unless an une;ual distribution is to t-e ad2antage of t-e wea.est
0e0bers of t-e society. :-is is w-y 9awls "*&5*7@2$ sees ,ustice as >si0#ly ine;ualities t-at are not to t-e
benefit of all?. Peo#le are born into different social #ositions wit- different c-aracter traits, #-ysical and 0ental.
:-ese are natural and social contingencies t-at t-e society oug-t to e;ualize in t-e distribution of social goods
and benefits. 9awls< ,ustice as fairness is a re,ection of utilitarianis0 since w-en t-ere is a conflict between
indi2idual rig-ts and general well-being, utilitarianis0 -olds t-at it is t-e clai0s of t-e latter w-ic- counts. Ee
definitely agree wit- 9awls t-at w-at 0a.es us to ac;uiesce in an erroneous t-eory is t-e lac. of a better one.
4ut -ow better 9awls is in t-is >better? t-eory is our neDt concern.

.% The Critique
It s-ould be stated t-at ,ust t-e sa0e way 9awls< social ,ustice attracted t-e ad0iration of so0e #-iloso#-ersC it
-as continuously attracted 2arious criticis0s. 9ogers "2!!!7*!$ -as obser2ed t-at t-e 4ritis- Ho00ission on
Social Justice is ;uite eD#licit in re,ecting 9awls< strictures against letting indi2iduals #rofit fro0 t-eir natural
s.ills and endow0ents. 9ogers accordingly #oses t-e following #uzzles7 w-at is t-e reason t-at des#ite its
co00endability, 9awls< t-eory -as not -ad any great i0#act on t-e >real? worldG E-y -as 9awls< wor.
a##eared to be dead as a #olitical force -a2ing enor0ous influence only at t-e t-eoretical le2elG +2en 9awls<
-i0self during t-e 2%t- anni2ersary of A Theory of Justice w-ic- was 0ar.ed wit- a su#er s#lendid large
conference at Santa Hlara, e;ually eD#ressed concerns about t-e fact t-at #olitical liberty is not al0ost infinitely
greater for so0e t-an it is for ot-ers. Jos-ua Ho-en, a for0er student of 9awls is ;uoted as saying t-at >9awls<
-o#efulness -as been s-a.en by t-e worldC -is feelings -a2e soured? "9ogers, 2!!!7)$. +2en at t-ese criticis0s,
intellectual descendants of 9awls are of t-e 2iew t-at 9awls< ti0e -as co0eC t-at -is ideas are so #owerful and
#rofound not to -a2e an effect on any real societies.
Journal of Law, Policy and Globalization www.iiste.org
ISSN 2224-24! "Pa#er$ ISSN 2224-2%& "'nline$
(ol.2), 2!*4

*@
9awls< #rinci#le of liberty eD#lained in t-e #re2ious #ages gi2es #riority to securing basic freedo0s7
freedo0s of t-oug-t, conscience, s#eec- and t-e li.es. 4ut cons#icuously absent a0ong t-ese basic liberties, is
t-e freedo0 to a##ro#riate w-at one -as #roduced t-roug- indi2idual talents or to in-erit or #ass on one<s
#ossessions. :o 9awls, t-e absence of t-ese liberties is no o2ersig-t or inconsistency as t-e difference #rinci#le
answers t-e ;uestion of distributi2e ,ustice #osed -ere. 9obert Nozic. -as criticized 9awls for not counting t-e
freedo0 to a##ro#riate t-e fruits of one<s labour a0ong basic liberties. 6not-er criticis0 le2eled against 9awls
is t-at of t-e entitle0ent t-eory w-ic- is associated wit- t-e difference #rinci#le.
9awls belie2es t-at indi2iduals w-o are 0ore #roducti2e due to t-eir natural endow0ents -a2e no
rig-t to greater rewards. :-e difference #rinci#le is an agree0ent to consider t-e #roducts of natural talents as a
co00on asset. Koun.ins "2!!47$ writes t-at >in t-is 2iew, an indi2idual<s natural endow0ents are not
considered to be -is own, but rat-er, t-e #roduct of t-e society?. In for0ulating t-e difference #rinci#le, 9awls
ob2iously 0isses certain facts about t-e -u0an talent. =or instance, -e fails to recognize t-at talents are not a
co00on #oolC t-e a#titude t-at one #erson en,oys does in no way lessens t-e nu0ber of 0agnitude of abilities
t-at are a2ailable to anot-er. 3y talents are not ac;uired at your eD#ense and to eD-ibit t-e talents nature -as
endowed one wit-, is a 0atter of c-oice. Indi2iduals s-ould li2e wit- t-e conse;uences of t-eir c-oices. :-ose
t-at wor. -ard and earn 0ore s-ould not be re;uired to subsidize for t-ose t-at c-oose 0ore leisure and -ence,
less inco0e. :-us, t-ere 0ust be #ro#er incenti2e for -ardous wor.ers. =ailure to do t-is 0ay constitute in,ustice
in t-e social setting.
9awls< #osture towards natural endow0ents lea2es us wit- t-e sus#icion t-at -e is trying to 0a.e en2y
an acce#table e0otion. Since t-e #roducts of natural endow0ents are t-e #ro#erties of t-e society, t-e society
oug-t to redistribute t-e0 in order to redress t-e ine;ualities of natural distribution. 9awls "*&5*7*!*$ o#ines
t-at >we see t-en t-at t-e difference #rinci#le re#resents, in effect, an agree0ent to regard t-e distribution of
natural talents as a co00on asset and to s-are in t-e benefits of t-is distribution w-ate2er it turns out to be?.
:-is is w-y Koun.ins "2!!47$ is 2ery 2ocal on t-is issue as -e writes t-at, >6 #ractical i0#lication of t-e
difference #rinci#le is t-at t-e society 0ust redistribute inco0e u# to t-e #oint w-ere t-e wealt- of t-e
re#resentati2e #oorest indi2idual, is 0aDi0ized. In ot-er words, t-e state s-ould taD and redistribute t-e wealt-
of 0ore ad2antaged u# to t-e #oint w-ere t-eir incenti2e to #roduce 0ore, disa##ears.
+2en if all #ersons were to begin wit- an e;ual social #osition as i0agined in t-e original #osition,
t-ey will end u# wit- different social #ositions, inco0e and wealt- as a conse;uence of t-eir c-oices. 6ny
atte0#t at redistribution or e;ualization would gi2e so0e #ersons less t-an t-ey 0erit. Aow can t-is be fairG
9awls see0s to trade on t-e legiti0acy en,oyed by 6ristotle<s discussion of distributi2e ,ustice in ichomachean
Ethics. 6ristotle<s conteDt is statistC t-at is, distributi2e ,ustice is so0et-ing t-e state dis#enses. :-e state -as t-e
wealt- and inco0e it 0ust allocate in t-e interest of t-e co00on good. 4ut -ow did t-e state co0e to ac;uire
t-e0G /id it 2iolate ,ustice in doing soG :-ese ;uestions need to be answered first before we co0e to -ow we
oug-t to fra0e our offer of forcibly eD#ro#riated goods. In t-e econo0ic s#-ere, after #roduction and eDc-ange
of w-at is #roduced, t-ere is no re0ainder fro0 w-ic- we can distribute wit-out 2iolating indi2idual<s rig-ts to
,ust entitle0ents. In a society of 2oluntary eDc-ange as (on-3ises "*&&@72$ #uts it >t-ere is no suc- t-ing as an
a##ro#riation of #ortions out of a stoc. of ownerless goods. :-e #roducts ca0e into eDistence as so0ebody<s
#ro#erty. If one wants to redistribute t-e0, one 0ust first confiscate t-e0?.
:-e idea of eDclusi2e owners-i# of #ro#erty seen in t-e entitle0ent t-eory is t-e only idea wit- w-ic-
we counter redistribution necessitated by t-e difference #rinci#le. 3agill "*&&!7@)*$ states t-at t-e central t-esis
of Nozic.<s Anarchy, State an, Utopia is t-at >only a 0ini0al state, one w-ic- li0its its functions to t-e
co00on dense and #rotection against cri0e is 0orally ,ustifiable and distributi2e ,ustice is satisfied w-ene2er a
#erson is entitled to -is -oldings?. 6nyi0 "2!!27&%$ -as rig-tly ;uestioned Nozic.<s idea of a 0ini0al state
arguing t-at only an eDtensi2e state can bring about en-anced distribution of goods. Ee can isolate t-e
entitle0ent t-eory fro0 t-is attac. since ,ust entitle0ent w-ic- is our concern does not co2er #ro#erty ac;uired
t-roug- un,ust 0eans. :-e entitle0ent t-eory -olds t-atC "i$ 6 #erson w-o ac;uires a -olding in accordance wit-
t-e #rinci#le of ,ustice in ac;uisition is entitled to t-at -oldingC "ii$ 6 #erson w-o ac;uires a -olding in
accordance wit- t-e #rinci#le of ,ustice in transfer fro0 so0eone else is entitled to t-at -oldingC and "iii$ No one
is entitled to a -olding eDce#t by re#eated a##lication of #rinci#les >iL and >ii? abo2e. :-e co0#lete #rinci#le of
distributi2e ,ustice would state si0#ly t-at a distribution is ,ust if e2eryone is entitled to t-e -oldings t-ey
#ossess under t-e distribution "Nozic., *&547*%*$.
3agill "*&&!7@)2$ is of t-e 2iew t-at >if social #roducts fell li.e 0anna fro0 -ea2en, t-e difference
#rinci#le 0ig-t be a suitable rule for t-eir distribution. 4ut it is not t-e a##ro#riate 0odel of deciding -ow to
di2ide u# t-e #ie w-en t-e contributors to t-e #ie are .nown?. If t-e least ad2antaged #ersons are star2ing, I -a2e
no duty to s-are 0y food wit- t-e0. Kou can a##eal to 0y generosity but no one -as any rig-t to seize 0y food
and s-are it e;ually a0ong us. 9awls was not only #reoccu#ied wit- #ro2iding a safety net for t-e wea. in a way
#eo#le would want to see a safety net for t-e wea., but t-at talents and -ard wor. are rewarded. Nobody
co0#lains about t-e earnings of a 4ill Gates, a 3ic-ael Jordan, a H-ristian 9onaldo, a :iger Eoods, a Eayne
Journal of Law, Policy and Globalization www.iiste.org
ISSN 2224-24! "Pa#er$ ISSN 2224-2%& "'nline$
(ol.2), 2!*4

*5
9ooney, a Lionel 3essi, a Sa0uel Peters and all #o#ular -eroes. 9awls -i0self s-ares t-e -onour of writing A
Theory of Justice wit- no ot-er. Ee are left to wonder w-et-er -e would acce#t t-at t-is -onour be s-ared
e;ually a0ong -is colleagues at t-e Aar2ard 1ni2ersityC let alone, t-e educationally least ad2antaged #eo#le.
Since for -i0, our ca#acity or -ard wor. is not legiti0ately ours and we do not deser2e t-e #roducts for our
talentsC t-ey s-ould be s-ared to t-e least ad2antaged. Ee are not sure t-at 9awls would agree to t-is
arrange0ent. =or w-ile it would be un,ust to coerce 9awls to acce#t it, we are not sure -e would grant us sa0e
freedo0.
6not-er ;uestion is7 w-o t-e least ad2antaged #ersons really areG Sc-aller "*&&)7*52$ as.s7 >but w-o
are t-e least ad2antaged in 9awls< t-eoryG? In A Theory of Justice, it is true t-at circu0stances o2er w-ic-
#eo#le -a2e no control s-ould not ad2ersely affect t-eir li2es #ros#ects. 4ut one 0ay legiti0ately ;uestion w-at
9awls 0eans by a >low-s.illed #erson?. E-y is t-e #erson so low-s.illedG Aow low is t-e >low?G Is it t-e
conse;uences of -is c-oices t-at 0a.e -i0 so low s.illedG E-o is #oorG :-ese so-called least ad2antaged
#ersons 0ay for all t-at 9awls -as s-own on t-e contrary -a2e e2eryt-ing t-ey are entitled to -a2ing. Nozic.
belie2es t-at on t-e contrary t-e difference #rinci#le is unacce#table because it #ro-ibits a large class of
acti2ities w-ic- are not un,ust and t-is #ro-ibition constitutes intolerable li0itations on indi2idual liberty. :-e
difference #rinci#le indeed offers ter0s on w-ic- t-e less endowed would be willing to coo#erate but it does not
offer ter0s on w-ic- t-e better endowed would be willing to coo#erate "3agill, *&&!7@)2$. 6lso t-ere are so0e
t-eoretical #roble0s in 9awls< social ,ustice. 9awls eD#licitly states t-at t-e original #osition is -y#ot-etical.
+tu. "2!!!722$ states t-at if t-is confession is 0eant to forestall any ob,ections t-at 0ay be raised against t-e
uto#ian nature of t-e initial e;uality t-en one 0ay consider t-e ob,ection silenced. 4ut in t-at case, t-e t-eory of
,ustice built on t-is #ro2ision beco0es e0#ty.
'ne finds co00on grounds wit- 9awls "*&5*7*$ w-en -e obser2es t-at >no society can, of course, be
a sc-e0e of coo#eration w-ic- 0en enter into 2oluntarily in t-e literal sense?, because t-e society is of course,
in2oluntary and our #lace in it largely beyond our control. 4ut t-en, after a #eriod, 9awls "*&5*722$ suffers
fro0 dro#outis0 es#ecially w-en -e states7 >Ba society satisfying t-e #rinci#le of ,ustice as fairness co0es as
close as a society can be in a 2oluntary sc-e0e?. +tu. "2!!!72$ strengt-ens t-is ob,ection wit- t-e 2iew t-at
>t-e society w-ic- we call t-e state w-ic- is 0uc- i0#licated in any discussion of ,ustice is not a 2oluntary
sc-e0e and ne2er will be eit-er. Peo#le are born into t-e state not by t-eir c-oice nor can t-ey c-ec. out at will?.
6 well ordered society of ,ustice is c-aracterized by fairness, one of t-e rele2ant #rinci#les of ,ustice, w-ic- is
#ublicly acce#ted by e2eryone. (aggallis "2!!%7*$ writes t-at >e2er since t-e #ublication of A Theory of Justice,
9awls -as been 0odifying -is conce#tion of ,ustice as fairness. Ae realizes t-at t-e .ind of stability t-at would
be needed in a de0ocratic society t-at is 0ar.ed by a #luralis0 of reasonable but co0#re-ensi2e 0oral 2iews is
inconsistent wit- t-e account of stability gi2en in 9awls< Theory+.
9awls co0es to realize t-at -is Theory of Justice is inconsistent. Ae also co0es to realize t-at w-ile
t-e liberal society is 0eant to #er0it a great di2ersity of 2alue syste0s, t-e argu0ents -e ad2ances for it would
only e2er a##eal to t-ose w-o acce#ted one set of 2alues "9ogers, 2!!!72*$. :-is s-ows t-at a well ordered
society of ,ustice tagged as fairness is an unrealistic ideal for a de0ocratic society. :-e ad0ission of t-is trut- is
t-e focus of 9awls< Political -iberalism in w-ic- -e i0agines t-at it is #ossible for #ersons wit- conflicting but
reasonable 2iews to reac- an >o2erla##ing consensus? in w-ic- ,ustice as fairness is t-e account, t-at is, 0ost
co0#atible wit- t-eir 2iews. Peffer "*&&!7!4$ is one of 9awls< ad0irers t-at write t-at >9awls< i0#licit
assu0#tion t-at all 0a,or grou#s wit-in de0ocratic societies can actually reac- a consensus on -is t-eory of
,ustice or any ot-er is al0ost laug-able?. It is not cleared t-at ,ustice as fairness would be able to ac-ie2e an
o2erla##ing consensus wit- ot-er 2iews. =or eDa0#le, would utilitarians e2er acce#t an o2erla##ing consensus
wit- ,ustice as fairnessG Ee now turn to t-e ;uestion of rele2ance.

/% Rele(ance of Rawls Social Justice and the Pro"le0 of Political Sta"ility in Nigeria in the 21st
Century and !eyond
:-e study as well as t-e ada#tation andFor a##lication of 9awls< social ,ustice -a2e beco0e 2ery #ertinent in
Nigeria es#ecially if one considers t-e fact t-at be-ind t-e instability of our #olity, necessitated 0ostly by un,ust
distributi2e s-ares, is t-e social ,ustice factor. 9awls< social ,ustice, -owe2er, is often c-allenged for lac.ing is
#ractical rele2ance. 4ut e2en 9awls< critic cannot deny t-at -e -as -ad an enor0ous i0#act on #olitical t-eory.
Ee can locate t-e rele2ance of 9awls< wor. on t-e i0#ortant ;uestion it raises es#ecially about utilitarianis0.
Let us eDa0ine t-e rele2ance of social ,ustice to t-e Nigerian society in t-e 2*st century and beyond. Aistorical
circu0stances -a2e 0ade t-e Nigerian society a culturally -eterogeneous societyC t-at is, a society di2ided along
et-nic lines. :-is is because t-e Nigerian state is one of suc- states t-at was forged and 0aintained by t-e
#olitical will of an alien #ower. :-is eD#lains w-y 0ost "if not all$, for instance, are first of all regarded as Ibibio,
Aausa, Igbo or Koruba before -e or s-e is eD#ected to act as a Nigerian. It is only social ,ustice t-at can restrain
t-e urge I t-e tendency for t-e 0a,ority et-nic grou#s to do0inate and 0arginalize t-e 0inority. In e0#-asizing
t-e need for social ,ustice, it is necessary to obser2e t-at social conflicts arise w-en grou#s #ossess or -a2e
Journal of Law, Policy and Globalization www.iiste.org
ISSN 2224-24! "Pa#er$ ISSN 2224-2%& "'nline$
(ol.2), 2!*4

*)
confir0ed t-e sus#icion t-at t-e state -as s-ort-c-anged or de#ri2ed t-e0 of accruing social benefits, rig-ts and
entitle0ents. In Nigeria, t-e trut- is t-at so0e -a2e been denied t-eir rig-ts and #ri2ileges. :-e Niger /elta
#eo#les are a case in #oint.
:-at a society wit- 0a,ority and 0inority et-nic grou#s is bound to be un,ust wit-out a syste0atic
a##lication of social ,ustice is a fact we cannot deny. 4ut t-ere is a 0ore i0#ortant ;uestion7 if it is t-e case t-at
0inority et-nic grou#s need to transcend t-e li0it of ,ustice, t-en -ow will t-is transition be 0adeG Is it t-roug-
2iolence seen in -ostage ta.ing, suicide bo0bings and t-e blowing u# of oil wellsG 'r will genuine social
transfor0ation be ac-ie2ed by #eaceful 0eans befitting -u0ans i0bued wit- reasonability and dignityG Aow can
we balance t-e desire to reac- our goals in relation to t-e 0eans we oug-t to ado#tG Aow can we a2oid t-e
contradictions t-at arise w-en t-e cause is as in2idious as t-e effect or w-en t-e cure is as terrible as t-e diseaseG
+tu. "*&&27*!$ in >God, Justice and 3inority Grou#s in Nation 4uilding? writes t-at >a nation t-at wis-es to
forge a-ead and attain econo0ic #rogress can ill-affordB t-e dis#lay of anger and -ostilityC because in t-e tas.
of nation building, t-e goodwill of e2ery citizen s-ould be -eld at a -ig- #re0iu0?.
:-ere -a2e been co0#lains of #olitical do0ination and et-nic 0arginalization in Nigeria. :-ese ser2e
as i0#ortant indicators t-at all is not well wit- t-e Nigerian social ,ustice syste0. :-ere is need for national
reconciliation w-ic- is t-e only #at- to national unity. 1,o0u "2!!72$ states t-at >enduring national
reconciliation can be ac-ie2ed only t-roug- social ,ustice?. :-is is true because t-e only #artners-i# t-at can be
enduring, stable and 2iable is one in w-ic- all #artici#ants are -a##y, satisfied and -a2e a sense of belonging.
9awls< social ,ustice on t-e w-ole is a sincere and co00endable atte0#t at i0#ro2ing t-e lot of t-e less-
#ri2ileged t-roug- a 0odified ca#italist t-eory. :-e i0#artiality of 9awls< #rinci#les 0a.es -is t-eory bot- ,ust
and co00endable to any co0#etent #erson. 9awls< stand on t-e 0arriage between 0orality and #olitics is a big
contribution to t-e central #roble0 of socio-#olitical #-iloso#-y, na0ely7 t-e #ossibility of ,ustice in a #olitical
en2iron0ent.
=or so0eti0es now, a lot of t-in.ers li.e 6ristotle, 3ac-ia2elli, Nietzsc-e, Aobbes, 3arD, etc -a2e
been greatly engrossed in t-eir atte0#ts to eD#licate t-e rationale be-ind un,ust and i00oral 0eans e0#loyed to
settle social #roble0sC but it is 9awls w-o -as clearly indicated t-e fact t-at any strong and lasting #olitical
t-esis 0ust be anc-ored on 0orality. 4y -is assess0ent of t-e ca#italist syste0 as un,ust because of t-e
in-u0ane 0anner by w-ic- t-e #oor wit-in t-e syste0 are eD#loited to t-e ad2antage of t-e ric-, 9awls -as
successfully singled out -i0self as a strong ad2ocate of t-e liberal ca#italis0. '0oregbe "*&&*7*%2$ -as clearly
stated t-at 9awls< social ,ustice is one w-ic- >tries to ta.e callousness, -eartlessness and indifference to t-e
#lig-t of t-e #oor, out of ca#italis0 and t-ereby 0a.e it 0ore 0orally acce#table. Its #re0ise is t-at t-ere is
ine;uality in society and, in t-is circu0stance, t-e 0ost 0oral cause of action is not to do anyt-ing t-at will
worsen t-e already bad condition of t-e #oor. Indeed no action, no social arrange0ent or c-ange s-ould be
allowed to ta.e #lace unless it is going to i0#ro2e t-e lot of t-e #oor?.
:-is is w-ere I ;uite agree wit- Jo-n "2!!&7@4$, t-at in a society w-ere certain basic rig-ts are gi2en
to certain ad2antaged #eo#le, it is not eD#ected t-en t-at social goods and rig-ts be eDtended to e2eryone in t-e
society. 4ut 9awls -as sufficiently #ro2ed t-at it is 0orally defensible for t-e society to re-distribute t-e social
goods for t-e benefit of all wit-out necessarily abusing t-e #rocedure or wit-out allowing t-e eDercise to beco0e
a gross 2iolation of any .ind of rig-ts due to certain #ri2ileged #eo#le. 3oreo2er, 9awls -as s-own t-at t-e idea
e0bedded in t-e re-distribution is of intrinsic 2alue to t-e w-ole society as it will be subli0ated into solid 0oral
duties li.e liberality and generosity.
:-e conte0#orary Nigerian society stands a better c-ance in t-e a##lication of 9awls< t-esis. :-e
benefits t-erefro0 would be enor0ous. =or instance, -is t-eory can rig-tly 2oid t-e te0#tation to abuse #olitical
#owers for 0oney, filial considerations and for et-nic and #aroc-ial interests. :-e twin yo.e of #oor
0anage0ent and corru#tion, w-ic- can be classified as one steady culture in different #arts of t-e world t-at -as
stood t-e taste of ti0e is a sad co00entary on Nigeria<s #olitical syste0. :-us, 9awls< #-iloso#-y -as #ro2ided
t-e world, es#ecially Nigerian nation wit- t-e necessary 0ac-inery w-ic- can sto# t-e #-eno0enon of ine#t
leaders-i# and unrestrained looting of t-e treasury by rulers and ot-er #ublic office -olders. :-is untoward and
daunting scenario for so long now -as substantially contributed to t-e #resent global econo0ic straits w-ic-
9awls< idea is ca#able of sal2aging it.
:-e greater c-allenge facing t-e world today in socio-#olitical 0atters -as always been -ow to
organize -erself 0ore de0ocratically. :-is is true because #olitics in Nigeria -as always been in disarray owing
to t-e obduracy and #er2asions of -er #oliticians. 6nd one of t-e #roble0s of de0ocracy in Nigeria is not wit-
t-e launc-ing of it, but its 0aintenance. Political eD#erience in t-e #ost-inde#endence Nigeria, for eDa0#le, -as
s-own t-at de0ocracy cannot flouris- in t-is country eDce#t Nigerians are ready and willing to abide by certain
certified nor0s and #rinci#les. Aence, t-e need for a #ro#er utilization of 9awls< #olitical conce#t -as beco0e
0ore c-allenging t-an e2er before. 6not-er i0#ortant issue is t-e incu0bency factor w-ic- is not-ing 0ore t-an
a eu#-e0is0 for t-e abuse of office and w-ic- -as greatly betrayed Nigeria<s atte0#ts at go2ernance. :-is issue
can be corrected t-roug- a #ro#er understanding of 9awls< social ,ustice. In t-is case, a single ter0 #ro#osal can
Journal of Law, Policy and Globalization www.iiste.org
ISSN 2224-24! "Pa#er$ ISSN 2224-2%& "'nline$
(ol.2), 2!*4

*&
be fas-ioned out for leaders in Nigeria andFor a situation in w-ic- eDecuti2e #owers and i00unities would not
be bestowed on indi2iduals but in a body "Jo-n, 2!!&7@%$.
Lastly, 9awls< social ,ustice can be used to correct t-e in,ustices #er#etrated by certain leaders. :-e
readily eDa0#le in t-is case is t-e issue of 0ilitary genocide in 'di "9i2ers State$ in *&&& and Mar.i 4ia0 and its
ad,oining co00unities of Gba,i, 6nyii, (asse and Iorfa "all in 4enue State$ of Nigeria in 2!!*. :-ese atrocities
-a2e really s-own t-e degree of #olitical debauc-ery on t-e #art of so0e leaders. =ro0 t-e bac.dro# of t-e
discussions, t-e following #uzzles 0ust be resol2ed7 "i$ Aas any reasonable go2ern0ent in t-e -istory of world
ci2ilization e2er used soldiers to conduct 0ass 0urder of innocent and defenseless ci2iliansG :-is ;uestion is so
crucial because 'di was but a direct battle-line engage0ent. Mar.i 4ia0 was a direct 0ass 0urder and .illing
under t-e #reteD of #eace .ee#ing. 'di and Sout--Sout- co00unities -a2e contributed to t-e Nigerian econo0y
and de2elo#0ent 0ore t-an any ot-er co00unity or region in NigeriaC "ii$ In s#ite of t-e Sout--Sout-
outstanding contributions t-an any ot-er region in Nigeria, w-at -as been t-e reward by eac- succeeding
go2ern0entG In 'goni-land, t-e #lace was de2astated during t-e dreaded era of Sani 6bac-a. 6t t-e end, nine of
t-e leaders were 0urdered by t-e =ederal Go2ern0ent of Nigeria. In 6.wa Ibo0, ,ust li.e ot-er Sout--Sout-
States t-ere is no federal #resence7 no road, lig-t or any federal institution. :-ere is no co0#ensation for t-e
eD#loitation of t-eir land w-ic- -as broug-t eDcruciating #ains and suffering to t-e #eo#le and its en2ironsC and
"iii$ Just li.e 'di, t-e :i2 #eo#le of :araba and 4enue States after contributing so 0uc- to t-e de2elo#0ent of
Nigerian 6r0y 0ore t-an any ot-er et-nic grou#, were gi2en a 0ilitary genocide as a reward. :-is ta.es us to
ot-er sets of #uzzle0ents as we as. wit- :erry Eaya "2!!*7*5$7 >Aas President 'basan,o e2er sent soldiers to
;uell riots w-ere 0a,or tribes were in2ol2ed, e2en w-ere t-e #olice and soldiers were .illed as in t-e Korub-
=ulani riots in Lagos, H-ristians and 3usli0s in "Jos$, Jaduna and JanoG... E-y s-ould President 'basan,o,
Generals :-eo#-ilus /an,u0a and 6leDander 'gbo0udia not face t-e International Ear Hri0es :ribunal?G
It was widely re#orted t-at t-e nati2es "t-e :i2 #eo#le$ .illed *& soldiers of t-e Nigerian 6r0y,
t-ereby #ro2o.ing t-e 0assacre of :i2 #eo#le by t-e federal troo#s. 4ut a critical in2estigation re2eals t-e trut-7
t-at %4 soldiers were arrested and .illed. :-e nati2es -a2e >0ista.en? all t-e soldiers for t-e fa.es t-at -a2e been
terrorizing t-e0 in t-e #ast. :-e ;uestions t-en are7 if only *& out %4 were identified as soldiers of t-e Nigerian
6r0y, w-at about t-e re0aining %G Eere t-ey t-e :u.uns ":i2<s arc- ene0ies$G E-o ga2e t-e0 0ilitary
unifor0s and guns to fig-t t-e :i2 #eo#leG Is t-ere any e2idence t-at t-e Nigerian 6r0y -as been 0isused
consistently to .ill :i2 #eo#le w-ene2er t-ere is a conflict between t-e0 and t-e Ju.unsG In *&&% and *&&&,
Juteb, a 0a,or :i2 tribe in :a.un Local Go2ern0ent 6rea of 4enue State was al0ost anni-ilated by t-e 6r0y-
bac.ed Ju.un 0ilitia.
6ny go2ern0ent t-at cannot face t-e facts or reasonably confront issues is not a res#onsible one for
t-at 0atter. Nigerian leaders 0ust, t-erefore, be 2ery careful else t-ey will be caug-t u# by t-e retributi2e ,ustice.
'ne s-ould re0e0ber (ictor 3alu, t-e for0er H-ief of 6r0y Staff, w-o led t-e 0ilitary battalion t-at sac.ed
'di, a slee#y 4ayelsa co00unity and its en2irons were sac.ed to t-eir foundations by t-e sa0e ar0y -e ser2ed,
used andFor 0isused. Ho00enting on 3alu and t-e idea of retributi2e ,ustice, Godwin 6dindu "2!!*725$ see0s
to understand not only t-e social ,ustice of 9awls but also t-e #oetic ,ustice w-en -e ad0its inter alia7 >B t-e
General w-o was a #oint 0an of 6bac-a in t-e tyrannical regi0e t-at turned Nigerians into wandering 0instrelsC
today, 3alu is recei2ing t-e sa0e treat0ent -e -ad watc-ed t-e 6bac-a regi0e 0et out to -is o##onents?. I
strongly belie2e t-at no one s-ould be decei2ed7 w-at t-e 4abangidas, t-e 6bac-as, t-e 'basan,os and t-e
Jonat-ans are doing now, sooner or later and e2en in deat-, t-ey s-all all face t-e 0usic.

1% Conclusion
In t-is wor., we set out to -a2e a criti;ue of 9awls< social ,ustice. Aa2ing seen -ow #-iloso#-ers in ti0e #ast
concei2ed of ,ustice, we -a2e seen so0e flaws in 9awlsian treat0ent of ,ustice. In see.ing to answer t-e
;uestion of rele2ance, we -a2e eDa0ined t-e Nigerian society and -a2e seen t-at gi2en -er -istorical antecedents,
social ,ustice is t-e only way to t-e 0uc- en2isaged national unity. 6s for 9awls, -is t-eory ser2es so0e
#ractical #ur#osesC distributi2e ,ustice is not an area w-ere an idea is good in t-eory but not in #racticeC if t-e
difference #rinci#le is not good in #ractice t-en it is not a good t-eory eit-er. :-us, t-e Nigerian socio-#olitical
#-iloso#-ers, religious and #olitical leaders as well as all and sundry s-ould stri2e to see t-e need of utilizing
9awls< 0aterials to #resent a #eculiar #-iloso#-ical outloo. for t-e Nigeria of 2*st century. :-is
reco00endation, in 0y o#inion, is wit- a 2iew to realizing -er coo#erate drea0s and as#irations of ,ust
indi2iduals in a ,ust state. 4ut 0ore t-an t-is, it 0ust be said t-at 9awls -as 0ade an in2aluable contribution to
t-e world. Indeed, -e -as singled out -i0self as a #owerful force t-at cannot be easily ignored in our ;uest for
social ,ustice.

References
6dindu, Godwin "2!!*$, >Go2ern0ent 6ccused 0e of :raining Secret 6r0y? in .nsi,er /ee0ly. No2e0ber *2,
##. *5-*).
Journal of Law, Policy and Globalization www.iiste.org
ISSN 2224-24! "Pa#er$ ISSN 2224-2%& "'nline$
(ol.2), 2!*4

2!
6nyi0, N. "2!!2$, >:-e Li0itation of Nozic.<s 3ini0al State in /e2elo#ing Hountries? in Sapientia$ Journal of
Philosophy. *F2, ##. )* - &%.
6ristotle "*&@2$, ichomachean Ethics. :ans. 3artin 'stwald. Indiana#olis7 4obbs 3erill.
4anu, 3. "2!!%$, >Social Justice and 9esource Hontrol in Nigeria7 6 Hrisis of
Legiti0acy?. 9etrie2ed on !%F*!F2!*! fro0 -tt#7FFwww.0odi.bo8-ot0ail.co0F2!!%, ##. I 4.
Han2endis-, 6. "*&@4$, >+arly Gree. P-iloso#-y? in /. J. '<Honnor "+d$ A 1ritical "istory of /estern
Philosophy. New Kor.7 :-e =ree Press, ##. -%.
+tu., 1do "*&&2$, >God, Justice and 3inority Grou#s in Nation 4uilding? in African Journal of #iblical Stu,ies.
2F2, ##. *!-*!4.
+tu., 1do "2!!!$, The Riches of Philosophy. 1yo7 Sc-olars Press.
=lood, :. "2!*!$, >6 Ho00ent on Professor Eolff<s =or0s of 9edistribution?. 9etrie2ed on !)F!%F2!*! fro0
-tt#7FFwww. Hatalyst foru0. org.u. F#ubsFarticle@-t0l, ##. *% - 2*.
Aobbes, :. "*&&*$, -e)iathan. :rans. 9ic-ard :uc.. Ha0bridge7 Ha0bridge 1ni2ersity Press.
Jo-n, +li,a- '.on "2!!&$, %an an, the State$ .ssues in Socio-Political Philosophy. 1yo7 6fa-aide Publis-ers.
3agill, =. "+d$ "*&&!$, %asterpieces of /orl, Philosophy. New Kor.7 Aar#er Hollins.
Nozic., 9obert "*&54$, Anarchy, State an, Utopia. New Kor.7 4asic 4oo.s.
'0oregbe, Jose#- "*&&*$, A Simplifie, "istory of /estern Philosophy "(ol. *$. Lagos7 Jo,a Press.
'wens, J. "*&&!$, %ar2ism, %orality an, Social Justice. New Jersey7 Prentice Aall.
Peffer, 9. %ar2ism, %orality an, Social Justice. New Jersey7 Princeton 1ni2ersity Press.
9awls, Jo-n "*&5*$, A Theory of Justice. Ha0bridge7 Aar2ard 1ni2ersity Press.
9ogers, 4. "2!!2$, >Jo-n 9awls?. 9etrie2ed on !)F!%F2!** fro0 -tt#7FFwww.artsweb.uwaterloo.ca.
9ussell, 4ertrand "*&5&$, A "istory of /estern Philosophy. London7 George 6llen and 1nwin.
Sc-aller, E. "*&&)$. >9awls7 :-e /ifference Princi#le and +cono0ic Ine;uality? in =ran. Lewis "+d$ Pacific
Philosophical 3uarterly "(ol. 5&$. 'Dford7 4lac.well Publis-ers, ##. *@&-*5@.
Sterba, 9. "*&)&$, >:oul0in to 9awls? in 9obert Ha2alier, et al "+ds$ Ethics in the "istory of /estern
Philosophy. London7 3ac0illan Press, ##. 4!@-4!&.
The "oly #ible$ The 4in* James 5ersion. London7 G. +. 3. Publis-ers.
1,o0u, P. "2!!$, >Internationalized 3arginality, Social Honflicts and t-e Nuest for National 1nity in an
6frican Nation State7 6 :-eoretical +D#loration? in African 6e)elopment. OO(III. F4, ##. !-44.
(aggallis, :. "2!!&$, >9awls< Political Liberalis0?. 9etrie2ed on !)F!%F!& fro0 -tt#7FFwww.caae.#-il.co0.edu,
##. *! - 2*.
(on-3ises, L. "*&&@$, >Honfiscation and 9edistribution? in 4ettina Grea2es "+d$ "uman Action$ The
7oun,ation for Economic E,ucation. New Kor.7 3ac0illan Press, ##. ! - 42.
Eaya, :erry "2!!*$, >3assacre of :i2? in The e&s. No2e0ber *2, ##. *@-*5.
Koun.ins, +. "2!!4$, >Jo-n 9awls< :-eory of 4lind Justice?. 9etrie2ed on !)F!%F** fro0
-tt#7FFwww.rebirt-ofreason.co02!!4, ##. - 5.
The IISTE is a pioneer in the Open-Access hosting service and academic event
management. The aim of the firm is Accelerating Global Knowledge Sharing.

More information about the firm can be found on the homepage:
http://www.iiste.org

CALL FOR JOURNAL PAPERS
There are more than 30 peer-reviewed academic journals hosted under the hosting
platform.
Prospective authors of journals can find the submission instruction on the
following page: http://www.iiste.org/journals/ All the journals articles are available
online to the readers all over the world without financial, legal, or technical barriers
other than those inseparable from gaining access to the internet itself. Paper version
of the journals is also available upon request of readers and authors.

MORE RESOURCES
Book publication information: http://www.iiste.org/book/

IISTE Knowledge Sharing Partners
EBSCO, Index Copernicus, Ulrich's Periodicals Directory, JournalTOCS, PKP Open
Archives Harvester, Bielefeld Academic Search Engine, Elektronische
Zeitschriftenbibliothek EZB, Open J-Gate, OCLC WorldCat, Universe Digtial
Library , NewJour, Google Scholar