Saturday, January 3, 2009

Rich and Poor: Justice is Blind, Totally Blind

I was totally dismayed when I heard the statement of parent whose son is being held under custody of a government Drug Board for alleged drug trafficking during an interview conducted by a news reporter. The parent who happens to be a media man himself admitted that his son is not a drug addict or pusher but a social user.

I tried to compose my thinking so as not to lose my sanity in understanding the difference between a person addicted to prohibited drugs and that of a social user. This elitist jargon reminds me of an old joke that spells the difference between the rich and poor. The joke goes like this: If you are rich and you have cough, it is called asthma but if you are poor, you have TB (Tuberculosis). If you are rich and have some red spots on your skin, it is called allergy but if you are poor, you have a galis (scabies). Klepto is for a rich brat caught shoplifting but thief if the offender is poor. A rich person uttering the “F” word in a social gathering is considered an expression made out of jest and socially acceptable but hearing the poor saying “Put…ina” (Son of a B…) means only one thing—uneducated and ill-mannered. So going back to my original point, what in heaven’s name is the difference of a social user and an addict? Nothing but what’s inside their wallets.

How many innocents were put behind bars because they were not properly represented or failed to avail the service of a competent lawyer? How about rich brats who are still roaming the street despite the overwhelming evidences against them but failed to put behind bars because of their influence? Worse, case being dismissed due to legal technicalities and ineptitude of some law enforcers?

Justice is blind or maybe-- too blind to see the worsening inequity in the administration of justice between those who can afford it and to those who cannot. Perhaps it’s about time to advice this blind-folded lady to put down her sword and equalizer for a moment to seek the advice of an ophthalmologist.

No comments: