Justice and Development

In Paris, during the 4th conference of the French speaking countries secretaries of Justice, one of the themes dealt on "Justice and Development", more precisely on the right and the regulation of Economy in the French speaking world.
There was a lot of discussions about the development of new forms of criminality favoured by the technologies of information, communication, and financial engineering, along with the topic of regional integration throughout organizations such as the OHADA.

I would here like to go further in a specific direction : the diversity of legal and judicial systems is compulsory if we want them to truly help development.
Justice is universal, and the State of Right is an undisputable target. But this being said, the way Justice is put into practice, the way the State of Right is realized, all of this offer multiple choices. It can't be reduced to clockwork schematics, nor measured in a merely quantitative way. The historical background, whether it be of Right itself or of judicial systems and their numerous agents, must not be overlooked if we don't it to become an obstacle which would be hidden from necessary evolutions.

Originally, Colonization, whether it be in sub Saharan Africa or in Latin America, wiped out the traditional structures of Justice and replaced them by judicial institutions and rules that did not fit the daily life and need of the people. As they were dominated out of strength, they had no choice but to skirt round the legal system and to go round the judicial system, before, once independent, getting rid of them. What we stigmatize under the name of vote-catching and corruption finds its origin in this rejection, and formerly was nothing but the advocating of a personal or social bond that was compulsory between the one whom demands justice, and the one who judges.

Let us be clear : Today, the monetization of human relations, the now achieved domination of merchant relationships have lead to an unbearable growth of corrupt practices, of the use of administrations or judicial bodies to illegally get hold of a share of wealth and to construct networks of mutual services despite global interest, neutrality of justice, and equity. Corruption still is one of the major obstacles to development.

But if that corruption, which is widely commented upon and denounced on a daily basis, is so hard to eradicate, is it the responsibility of any kind of right? Some approaches related to judicial organization, more than to the legal system, claim so. They all come to the conclusion that one specific right is pre-eminent over the others, and that the convergence of all systems is a necessity.

Things can be seen under a different light. There is no such thing as a "better right", as soon as it has the capacity to regulate the relations between individuals or communities, to protect the Weak and to establish equity in the functioning of the community. What it truly discussed is the governance of Justice.

The societies of developing countries have built up their own legal structures which have their own logic from the basis of the great European rights which were imposed to them, along with their own traditions. It is from this logic, and from one's history one has to start if he wants to fight efficiently against drifts and defalcations.

No right ever proved to be fit against corruption and ultra vires. It is the whole political body which progressively limits those crimes. It has to regularly mobilize so that they are not born again. It does it all the better when it can use legal and judicial tools with which it is familiar, and when it feels responsible to handle those problems.

I, obviously, do not underestimate those new forms of delinquency that are weakening states and burdening their functioning : Terrorism, Trans National organized criminality, laundering and cyber criminality. The legal frame of each country ought to be able to adapt in order to take into account the globalization of trades, of economies, of the migration of the people. It is indeed in the very dialogue between the different systems of right, and in the thorough study of them all that we will find efficient answers, and not in a standardization that is due to favour the richest and best skilled people among those bypassing regulations.