Rule of Law and Rule of Man

Ashleigh 2022-04-23 07:01:08

Whether a society is stable or not, the key factor is not how much wealth is created, but whether the distribution of wealth is fair; nor how many provisions there are, but whether people's rights are fully protected. The American judicial system shown in the movie "Twelve Angry Men" is a good example of respect for human rights. There are two things that impressed me a lot.
First, the jury system. This system, which originated in ancient Greece, seems unbelievable to us Chinese. A group of law-ready lawyers are fighting in court to prove their point to some outsiders in the law. The justices who are familiar with various laws have no right to make judgments of their own, but can only act as a referee in the courtroom. Isn't it a bit contradictory to hand over the power of judgment to people who have no legal knowledge in this country under the rule of law? In fact, this is the crux of the system. Putting the power of judgment in the hands of unrelated people can avoid personal prejudice and institutional prejudice to the greatest extent possible. When the jurors regard justice as their sole criterion, the greatest purpose of the system is achieved. The lack of professional knowledge can be made up for by later means.
Second, reasonable doubt. In the process of trial of criminals, criminals are actually at a disadvantage. In the American judicial system, there are many systems to protect the rights of criminals. First, criminals do not need to carry items that identify criminals, such as handcuffs, hinges, etc., when they are interrogated. Second, criminals and prosecutors are on an equal footing, and it can even be said that prosecutors are disadvantaged. To bring criminals to justice, prosecutors need to provide sufficiently strong and irrefutable evidence. The offender only needs to raise a reasonable doubt. That is, criminals cannot be convicted when they present sufficiently persuasive reasons for doubting the prosecutor's evidence. Furthermore, criminals do not need to prove their innocence, but only need to make the other party suspect that their reasons are not valid.
In fact, we can see from the above that even in the United States, which is above the rule of law, not everything can be solved through legal provisions. Whether it is the judge system or the reasonable doubt system, in the end of a case, it all boils down to the individual who makes the decision. The law can always only prescribe procedures and determine standards. So, why is China's system still lingering in the quagmire of the rule of man even though China's system is becoming more and more abundant and complete? In fact, the rule of law is not something that can be achieved by the constitution or other provisions. The rule of law is a kind of cultural precipitation, respect for the law and human rights, and rational belief. Like in the movie, maybe these people come from different places, maybe these people have different qualities, maybe these people have completely different values, but when the dissident played by Henry Fonda puts forward his own ideas , these people have to be persuaded step by step. We can see that they may have made their own judgments rashly, and may be unwilling to think more, but the judgments they make are completely based on their own hearts and the justice they recognize, and this is The most important thing about the jury system. As Chinese, what thoughts pop into our minds when we see the jury system? Is it: Americans are too simple, and this system is too easy to be used? If such a system is used, what justice can there be? Ha ha. That's what separates us from them, and that's why we can't escape the rule of man at all. Of course, a reasonable, complete and mature system is indeed very important. But more important is respect for the law, and even belief. When you violate a law, no one will find out, and no harm will be done to others, will you feel at ease? Do you feel at ease when you break the law for your own benefit, or for higher reasons? In fact, you are wrong. When you don't pay attention to the law, when you violate the law for your own interests, and when your interests need the protection of the law, you will find that the law has become a dead letter. Only a thorough rule of law can protect the people, don't count on the blue sky, that's just a myth.
In today's China, power is greater than law. This is a lack of culture, it's a lack of education. From what I can see, my parents have no respect for the rules, for the law. It's not their fault that they grew up during the Cultural Revolution without laws. However, since China is moving towards a country ruled by law, imprinting the rule of law in the culture is the real useful method. When a person encounters difficulties, the first thing that comes to mind is the law, not the relationship, only then can China truly move towards a society ruled by law.

View more about 12 Angry Men reviews

Extended Reading

12 Angry Men quotes

  • Juror #8: [after conducting an experiment to see if the old man could have reached his door in 15 seconds] Here's what I think happened: the old man heard the fight between the boy and his father a few hours earlier. Then, when he's lying in his bed, he heard a body hit the floor in the boy's apartment, heard the woman scream from across the street, got to his front door as fast as he could, heard somebody racing down the stairs and *assumed* it was the boy!

    Juror #6: I think that's possible!

    Juror #3: [from the other side of the room] *"Assumed"?*

    [Everyone looks at #3 as he chuckles]

    Juror #3: Brother, I've seen all kinds of dishonesty in my day, but this little display takes the cake. Y'all come in here with your hearts bleedin' all over the floor about slum kids and injustice, you listen to some fairy tales... Suddenly, you start gettin' through to some of these old ladies. Well, you're not getting through to me, I've had enough.

    [starts shouting]

    Juror #3: What's the *matter* with you guys? You all *know* he's guilty! He's *got* to burn! You're letting him slip through our fingers!

    Juror #8: [brow furrowing] "Slip through our fingers"? Are you his executioner?

    Juror #3: I'm one of 'em!

    Juror #8: ...Perhaps you'd like to pull the switch?

    Juror #3: For this kid? You bet I would!

    Juror #8: [baiting him] I feel sorry for you. What it must feel like to want to pull the switch! Ever since you walked into this room, you've been acting like a self-appointed public avenger. You want to see this boy die because you *personally* want it, not because of the facts! You're a sadist!

    [#3 lunges wildly at #8, who holds his ground. Several jurors hold #3 back]

    Juror #3: I'll kill him! I'll - *kill him!*

    Juror #8: [calmly] You don't *really* mean you'll kill me, do you?

  • Juror #8: [taking a cough drop that Juror #2 offered him] There's something else I'd like to talk about for a minute. Thanks. I think we've proved that the old man couldn't have heard the boy say "I'm gonna kill you", but supposing he did...

    Juror #10: [interrupting] You didn't prove it at all. What're you talking about?

    Juror #8: But supposing he really *did* hear it. This phrase, how many times have all of us used it? Probably thousands. "I could kill you for that, darling." "Junior, you do that once more and I'm gonna kill you." "Get in there, Rocky, and kill him!"... See, we say it every day. That doesn't mean we're gonna kill anyone.

    Juror #3: Wait a minute, what are you trying to give us here? The phrase was "I'm gonna kill you"; the kid yelled it at the top of his lungs... Don't tell me he didn't mean it! Anybody says a thing like that the way he said it, they mean it!

    Juror #2: Well, gee now, I don't know.

    [Everyone looks at #2]

    Juror #2: I remember I was arguing with the guy I work next to at the bank a couple of weeks ago. He called me an idiot, so I yelled at him.

    Juror #3: [pointing at #8] Now listen, this guy's tryin' to make you believe things that aren't so! The kid said he was gonna kill him, and he *did* kill him!

    Juror #8: Let me ask you this: do you really think the kid would shout out a thing like that so the whole neighborhood could hear him? I don't think so; he's much to bright for that.

    Juror #10: Bright? He's a common, ignorant slob. He don't even speak good English.

    Juror #11: [looking up] He *doesn't* even speak good English.