15th January, 2002

A Compilation of Papers presented at the Forum of Faiths Meeting in the new Crown Courts, Russell Road, Ipswich on Thursday 23 September

Contributors
Dr Sushil Soni – Hindu
Robin Herne – Pagan
Adrianus van Helvert – Buddhist
Rabbi Joshua Narrowe – Jewish
Chris Yule – Christian
Mojlum Khan – Muslim
Prabjot Kaur – Sikh
Nazila Ghanea-Hercock – Baha’i
Margaret Nelson – Humanist

The following articles formed the basis of the introductory talks on justice delivered on Thursday 23^rd September 2004 in the new Crown Courts, Ipswich. In some cases shorter versions were delivered, while others were elaborated on the night. The Sikh article has subsequently been extended in response to a request for more information.

Our intention was for the speakers to open a discussion on this important subject in the hope that others would want to add their contributions to an ongoing dialogue between the faiths on this important and relevant topic. We will be arranging other opportunities for this to happen, so please keep in touch (www.sifre.org.uk)

We are very grateful to the Crown Prosecution Service for making their facilities available and for supporting the event.

We are also grateful to the speakers for setting the scene and for their openness to each other. As Mojlum Khan said, at the end of his presentation: “We live in difficult times and unless we learn from each other and help each other we are likely to make things worse.”

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hinduism as a faith is a vast subject, and what it says about justice is also an important aspect of it. The Oxford Concise Dictionary and the Every Day English Concise Dictionary define justice as “Just treatment, fairness, impartiality, rectitude and the quality of being just”.

Now how does this definition fit into Hinduism? It is not difficult to find in the holy texts. In the Bhagvat Gita, the Hindu holy book, in Ch. 4, verses 7 & 8, Lord Krishna says to Arjuna:

Yda Yda Hi Dharmasya, Gilani Bharvati Bharat
Abhyu Thanam Dharmasya, Tadata Manam Sarjya Mayahamam;
Paritrayamam Sadhunam, Vinashaya Cha Dushkratam
Dharam Sansthapana Tharya, Sanbhvaami Yuge Yuge.

Hey Arjuna, whenever righteousness is on the decline, and unrighteousness is in the ascendant, then I body myself forth, for the protection of the virtuous; for the extirpation of evil- doers; and for establishing Dharam (righteousness) on firm footing; I am born from Age to Age.

Here it will be noted that it is in the word ‘Dharam’, or ‘righteousness’, that the meaning of justice is found. From time to time Hindu sages have written commentaries on all aspects of life within the community for the benefit of society, based on the concept of Dharam.

Kautilya, also known in Hindu literature as Chanakya, a shrewd politician, wrote Artha Shastra, describing how a king should rule his kingdom, and give justice to his subjects, and how to deal with his enemies and to protect his kingdom and his subjects. His treatise also describes the economy of earning a livelihood and leading a successful and prosperous family life. Kautilya was the Prime Minister of Chandra Gupta Maurya, who ruled India in 325BC.

Even before Kautilya, the sage Manu wrote Dharam Shastra, in which he described, how all members within the family unit, community and within the kingdom at large, live according to their varnas (caste) and jati (profession). It describes the duties of each caste, i.e. of Brahamans, Khsatriyas, Vaishyas and Shudras. He also wrote a treatise on the provision of justice called Nayaya Shastra. In this, Manu describes how a king or his ministers should provide justice to their subjects. It deals with civil and criminal justice according to the Hindu principle of Dharam. It also deals with the relationship between man and woman, husband and wife; treatment towards children; and the individual duties owed to friends, brothers, sisters, parents, teachers, gurus, as well as the king and his ministers.

The Hindu epics, the Mahabharat and the Ramayana are very clear on how the Hindu faith should be implemented, according to Dharam, or righteousness. The Mahabharat is the story of King Bharat, whose descendants the Kauravs and the Pandavs, cousins, fought a war of righteousness, in which the Kauravs, who were unwilling to accept the right of their cousins Pandavs, were defeated. It is here in the battlefield of Kureckshetra, about 50 miles north of Delhi, that Lord Krishna recited the Bhagvat Gita to Arjuna, the Pandav warrior, and advised him to carry out his duties and actions according to his Kshatriya (or warrior caste) Dharam. Krishna revealed to Arjuna that divine justice takes precedence over human morality and that humans are not be able to see the total picture and their choice is therefore fallible.

Kurackshetra is described in Bhagvat Gita as the battlefield of Dharam. Straight from the teachings to Arjuna are the words: it is better to perform your own Dharam imperfectively than another’s well. This is what Lord Krishna described as “Sva Dharam”.

Shreyans Sarva Dharmaha Vigunah, Pardharamastava Nishthitat
Sva Dharma Nidhanam Shreyah, Pardharamah Bhaya Vaha

It is better to die doing one’s own Dharam, even if of poor quality, than to do another’s well. (the Bhagvat Gita, Ch. 3, verse 35).

In Hindu society, importance is given to knowledge and to Dharam, since knowledge and actions go hand in hand according to Dharam.

In the Ramayana, which contains the lifestory of Lord Rama and his wife Sita, Lord Rama is described as an ideal son, husband, brother and ruler, who ruled his kingdom according to the wishes of His people, and provided justice to everyone according to Dharam. Sita is described as an ideal wife, sister-in-law and mother. Her forceful kidnapping by deception was an evil act on the part of Ravana, the king of Sri Lanka. But Sita never surrendered to him; neither did Ravana force her to marry him against her wishes. Though an evil person, Ravana was also learned. The story ends with the victory of good over evil. That is why still now Indians regard Lord Rama’s rule of Ayodhya as the “Ram Rajya,” when people were happy and contented, and where truth prevailed.

The Hindu faith does not believe in tit for tat – ie to give punishment to person according to his crime. Forgiveness and the reform of criminals is part of the Hindu faith. We all are children of God, and we are also fallible, and therefore from time to time may commit minor or big mistakes, and so ask for forgiveness or accept the punishment as part of our bad action. It has always been our prayer to Almighty God to give us such knowledge, that we do good actions and be always willing to forgive those who have done wrong intentionally or unintentionally. There is a famous song from the internationally acclaimed Indian film Do Aankhe Barah Haadh (Two eyes and twelve hands) which deals with prison reforms around the story of a jailer and his six criminals.

Oh God We are your children – Bless us with such tasks, that we do always good and keep away from bad actions – so that when we die, we have a smile on our face.

The Hindu faith advises that justice should be meted out to evil-doers according to Dharam, not forgetting forgiveness, and the appropriate punishment should be administered according to their actions. Additionally, support should be given to the victims of crime, through charity, help and counselling. To live in an ideal world would mean the total renunciation of prohibited acts of violence, untruth, and of depriving others of their rights, because of one’s selfish motives. But we are not living in an ideal world, and that is why God has enunciated Dharam or righteousness, so that we are able to live in a secure and safe world with happiness and contentedness.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

In law courts across the world statues can be seen of a woman holding scales and wielding a sword. This is the Greek goddess Themis, who continues still to rally her devotees to the cause of justice, as she did in the ancient world.

For the Egyptians, the goddess Ma'at also bore a set of scales in which truth could be weighed. For ancient and modern Kemetics, the harmony and order of Ma'at governs the universe, and both Gods and men bow to her. The power of Ma'at is not simply a matter of obeying rules, but of righteous living in balance and peace with the whole world – the living, the dead, animals, plants, the environment, the Gods themselves.

Given that women were not even allowed to sit on juries until comparatively recently, it may seem ironic to many that the West has continued to view justice as female long after turning away from the old goddesses.

The term paganism covers a number of different religions, and each have their own ideas as to what actions constitute a crime, and how best to punish them. Some pagan cultures are quite liberal, others draconian.

The early Celtic and Germanic tribes laid a heavy emphasis upon restorative justice, and the modern followers of their religions continue to do so. The Brehon law courts of early Ireland viewed crime as an attempt to forcibly take something from a third party. An aggressor might rob someone of their property, their good name, their health or their life. One of the duties of the judge was to allot a monetary value to that which had been taken, and order the criminal to pay this back along with a compensation to others affected.

Seeing a burglar imprisoned may give some satisfaction, but it still does not replace one’s missing goods. For both ancient and modern druids, it is important that the victims should have some amends made to them by the criminal. This is a system that British law is gradually beginning to turn back to, though too often any compensation comes out of the public purse and not from the villain in question.

This principle may be applied to all areas of life. Justice is not simply something doled out in a courtroom – it is about how we treat each other on a daily basis; about how our shopping choices affect the people who manufacture the goods we buy; about how our actions impact upon the earth and all her creatures; about how we thank our Gods for their generosity; about how we honour the memory of the dead.

It is unethical to take something without consent and, where we do, we should look to pay back with compensation: chop down one tree, plant three in its stead.

In ancient times it was the duty of every great warrior to protect the weak. It was the duty of every citizen of the tribe to bring pressure to bear upon the guilty, to force them to pay their dues. The Celts provided a number of social mechanisms for this, such as the troscad or hunger-strike. Most of these forms are no longer viable in the 21st century, but it is cheering to see ever-growing numbers of people from all walks of life that are prepared to become agents for justice – be it writing letters of protest, going on marches, shopping ethically, or using any of a dozen other non-violent means. The more that ordinary people are willing to take responsibility for justice, the better our collective futures look.

Unfortunately, rallying to a cause for social justice can, too often, mask a myriad of motives. Too many people enjoy fury for its own sake, and fuel fires of supposed outrage which they have no intention of ever quenching.

Feuds must ultimately end in the acceptance of justice by both parties, not just the captured miscreant. Greek myth gives us the example of Orestes, who killed his own mother in reprise for her murder of his father. The Furies pursued him for this terrible act of kin-slaying, till at last the wise goddess Athena, sustainer of civic order, judged him to have suffered enough under their yoke. Orestes was washed clean of the blood on his hands, and the Furies retired, satisfied.

At some stage the victims of injustice, and their defenders, must draw a line under the crime and move on. The perpetrators must be allowed to begin life afresh, their deed paid for. Otherwise the feuds become unending, and the shadows cast by the first act deepen until we are all wandering in the night.

Robin Herne 2004

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Thank you for inviting me to take part in this dialogue. I will briefly talk about:

“Your majesty, if you are prepared to debate in the Speech of the Wise I shall debate with you. But if you wish to debate in the Speech of Kings I shall decline … In the Speech of the Wise the parties never become angry over explanations, interpretations, criticisms or revisions in the course of debate … By contrast in the Speech of Kings they insist that only one view prevails. If one refuses to go along with this they declare ‘Punish this person’” ⁽¹⁾

This was a learned Buddhist monk’s reply when asked in the 2^nd century BCE by a king well versed in Greek philosophy, to debate with him. My intention today is to converse with you in the Speech of the Wise (though my children would tell you that I am not averse to using the Speech of Kings on occasion!).

The Speech of the Wise emphasises the basic equality of all, regardless of social position and knowledge, and it challenges us not to take offence at the views and opinions of others.

“Unless each of us has a steadfast unshakeable philosophy – something that we remain true to throughout our lives – unless we are grounded in that firm and solid earth, our lives will be as aimless and drifting as rootless plants floating in a stream. Standards of integrity and character are compromised or lost; the public discourse degenerates into mindless parroting of empty platitudes, art becomes effete and malnourished and government declines into mere expediency and sham.”⁽²⁾

Everybody has a philosophy of life (ideas about the world, how it works and what’s important) and an ‘object of worship’ – the thing in life that’s most important to them – it could be a lover, their car, their football team, God or whatever. These are not set in stone but can change overtime. The above quote arguably sums up the problem of the world we live in. The injustice that we see is a symptom of the lack of a steadfast, unshakeable and profound philosophy in the lives of the majority of people.

The great religions and traditions of our human family have reflected our struggles to understand our past and guide our present behaviour and our steps into the future. Which of these teachings can best lead us toward a future of peace, justice and harmony with all life? Which beliefs have proved dysfunctional and need to be discarded as we proceed on our journey?

My journey in finding answers to these questions began on 30^th June 1972 when my ‘object of worship’ – my father; died of Coronary Heart Disease. I was just 11 yrs old. This brought home to me the reality of what Buddhism calls the four sufferings (birth, aging, sickness and death). Any profound religion / philosophy must grapple with this issue – first learn about death, then learn about other matters. We must live with the fact that we will die and consider how death means we should live. It has been said that ours is a culture that is in denial about death.

My journey was influenced by a sense of ‘global citizenship’ (on account of my mixed Ipswichian / Dutch / Creole heritage), my father’s experiences of the horrors of war (which had left him physically and mentally scarred) and the racism he experienced to some extent as an immigrant. From 1972 to 1992 my search took me to Socialism, Quakerism, Anglicanism and Environmentalism before I found a philosophy and practice that fully answered my questions in Nichiren Buddhism. We are chanting rather than meditating Buddhists – our mantra is Nam myoho renge kyo ⁽³⁾.

I’m sure the panel of speakers we have here today will provide a good cross section of views from various religious traditions but we must remember that there are a great variety of religions / philosophies. Tony Blair could not speak on behalf of all Christians (on e.g. the concept of a just war) and I cannot stand here today and talk on behalf of all Buddhists. I can however share with you my thoughts as a practitioner of Nichiren Buddhism for 12 yrs now, and as a leader of those practising in Suffolk and North Essex. Much of what I say may resonate with many other Buddhists of other traditions and even non-Buddhists.

I am inspired greatly in my thoughts by my mentor, Daisaku Ikeda, president of the SGI, the lay Buddhist society of which I am a member. He is not well known in this country (though one of his 100 honorary doctorates from around the world was conferred by Glasgow University), but in SE Asia in particular his tireless work over the last 50 yrs as a peace activist and educationalist (as well as a leader of our Buddhist movement) is well known. He is honoured in the naming of the Gandhi / King / Ikeda award which is conferred each year by Morehouse College (the college attended by Martin Luther King) on someone who has worked in difficult political circumstances to create a sense of community across sectarian divides.

“Bodhisattva Never Disparaging… whatever persons he happened to meet … would bow in obeisance to all of them and speak words of praise saying ‘I have profound reverence for you, I would never dare treat you with disparagement or arrogance.’ … When the people heard this they gibed at him, cursed and reviled him, but he bore all this with patience.”⁽⁴⁾

This attitude is at the absolute heart of Buddhism. As Nichiren later wrote “The heart of the Buddha’s lifetime of teachings is the Lotus Sutra, and the heart of the practice of the Lotus Sutra is found in the ‘Never Disparaging’ chapter. What does Bodhisattva Never Disparaging’s profound respect for people signify? The purpose of the appearance in this world of Shakyamuni Buddha [the founder of Buddhism] … lies in his behaviour as a human being … The wise may be called human, but the thoughtless are no more than animals.”⁽⁵⁾

Shakyamuni’s purpose was to ‘open the door of wisdom to all living beings’⁽⁶⁾ – in other words to enable all people to manifest their Buddha nature and attain the same enlightened state he had. Buddhism is faith in life, faith in the human spirit, faith in the fact that people can reveal their Buddhahood.

The western impression that Buddhism is all about meditation is alien to the spirit of its founder Shakyamuni. The goal of Nichiren Buddhism is neither escape from reality nor passive acceptance. It is to live strongly, proactively in such a way as to refine one’s own life and reform society through a constant exchange between the outside world and the individual’s inner world.

The human being is not seen as a frail wretch at the mercy of fate, but as a powerful agent of change. Everyone has Buddhahood – the potential to live life with great energy, courage, wisdom and compassion. And thus everyone is worthy of the deepest respect. As a Buddhist I worship life itself (there is no God for me, no single creative act in the historical past). My goal is to reveal my Buddhahood and inspire others to do the same.

The spirit of Buddhism is this story of Bodhisattva never Disparaging and it is this spirit that would underpin any justice system built on Buddhism – the key being the syllable ‘par’ (in the word disparaging) meaning we are all on a ‘par’, neither superior or inferior to one another. It goes hand in hand with our personal struggle against isolationism toward recognition of our interconnectedness with others and our sense of community.

This is an age of conflict. Seemingly swept along by an irresistible force, countries and individuals are carried from one conflict to the next. The strength to stand firm against this raging current of the times can be found in the unshakable belief in the Buddha nature within ourselves and others, as well as in actions that put this belief into practice and show respect for the lives of all people. The irresistible momentum that leads to conflict arises from ignorance, specifically a lack of awareness or belief that all people possess the Buddha nature. This ignorance is the dark impulse that drives one to disrespect human life and violate its innate dignity. The inherent devilish nature of authority and religion, the dominant cause of conflict in this age, has this ignorance as its foundation.

“The Buddhist law of causality is, indeed, rigid and severe”⁽⁷⁾

Since the universe operates according to the law of cause and effect (karma), as a Buddhist I can leave punishment to the operation of this law which is in some way analogous to a physical law of the universe like gravity. Thus when I hear the word justice my first thought is fair and equitable treatment and access to resources and not punishment according to a set of rules.

ii) To encourage those individuals (through rehabilitation, education and challenging dialogue) to reflect on and change their philosophy of life. Dialogue between criminals and the victims can be key to this process.

The system would seek to deter through creative and imaginative rehabilitation, education and dialogue rather than through fear of punishment. Punishment is not ruled out totally as a deterrent, but would need to be shown to work (otherwise it is just retribution) and should still operate alongside rehabilitation / education / dialogue, since only if we have inspired change in people’s hearts and minds (or in some cases changed the law to come in line with people’s hearts and minds) can the justice system be deemed to have succeeded.

As a Buddhist, if I were working within the criminal justice system I would be mindful of the following. Depending on how we talk to criminals they will either be encouraged or disheartened. The way we interact with them reflects our innermost resolve. What’s most important is whether or not we are truly concerned about their welfare and whether or not we pray sincerely for their future well-being. In any case, it’s essential to respect each of them as individuals. Within each criminal is a potential good citizen. If we address him/her on that level we can enable his/her character to blossom. And based on this kind of effort we would be able to develop ourselves as well.

Even though one may resort to harsh words, if such words help the person to whom they are addressed then they are worthy and to be regarded as truthful words and gentle words. Similarly though one may use gentle words, if they harm the person to whom they are addressed they are in fact deceptive harsh words. True education is less about conveying a list of rules than about conveying a spirit of respect and concern through our own actions and practice.

“I do not believe that religion has nothing to do with politics. The latter divorced from religion is a corpse only fit to be buried.” (Mahatma Gandhi)

Buddhism emphasises the interrelatedness of things. Thus successfully tackling the important political issues of our time will improve the context within which the criminal justice system operates. The following briefly introduces some of the key political issues which my Buddhist organisation is concerned with.

Obsession with GNP: Bhutan, a Buddhist nation in the Himalayas, when faced with the onslaught of free market globalisation, the WTO, and the emphasis on ‘Gross National Product’, came up with new indicators of ‘Gross National Happiness’ which emphasise the importance of clarifying the goals and values of a society and creating indicators to measure what we treasure – health, happiness, education, human rights, family, harmony, peace, environmental quality / restoration. Polls across the world show these to be the priorities of people, yet too many governments spend precious taxes on weapons, conflict and the technology agendas of military contractors and global corporations. None of these measures are at the heart of the policies of the economically powerful nations, whose total focus is GNP, and whose populations are as a result leading spiritually impoverished lives with appallingly low levels of mental health.

The environment: Another sign of hope is the Earth Charter – a collaborative effort of religious and non religious organisations & NGOs around the world to develop a set of ethics for an equitable and ecologically sustainable future.

Humanistic education, responsible media, fair trade and International Law: In building a society, democracy is one important piece of the jigsaw. Another is an effective, humanistic and holistic education system that is not overly focussed on producing workers for corporations. Another is a mass media which digs deeper for the causes of violent events and inspires people toward new possibilities and a brighter future, rather than enmeshing humanity in negative images of primitive and violent behaviour and cycles of revenge. Yet another is a fair international trading set up. Finally I would mention a system of global justice, a permanent court capable of trying individuals who violate international laws against genocide, war crimes, crimes against humanity; this being a prerequisite to universal disarmament. Such a court is a pillar around which the ‘International law of peace’ can be enhanced and elaborated (at present some key nations including the USA are opposed to this).

Cultural arrogance: We should perhaps guard against arrogance in our dealings with other nations demanding they adopt our notion and system of democracy, when our own jigsaw is far from complete, and forcing this one piece of the jigsaw on others may exacerbate their situation. From a Buddhist perspective equality and democracy alone lacks the factor of ‘elevation of life condition’ – what use is democracy if it is rooted in a low life condition because other pieces of the jigsaw (mentioned in the previous paragraph) are missing?

“If you care anything about your personal security, you should first of all pray for order and tranquillity throughout the four quarters of the land should you not” ⁽⁸⁾

Nichiren Buddhism has been described as a disciple (not mentor) centred religion. The focus is on how we inspire people to raise their life condition, rather than veneration of some external entity (God, saviour, The Buddha etc.). If someone says ‘I am the mentor, follow me’ nothing has really changed – we become dependent. However when the mentor puts his philosophy into practice and disciples choose to share his heart / spirit and take action alongside him, then the course of human history can change. I believe this is the true worth of The Buddha, Jesus, Mohammed and others – their ability to inspire others to take the right action.

As such, Buddhism encourages independence of thought based on one’s own Buddhist practice, and not passive compliance. We develop our own sense of what’s right and wrong, and this may not totally comply with the Law of the Land. Having said this, Nichiren Buddhism places great importance on a sense of gratitude for the social structure (including the justice system) around us and the benefits that we gain as a result. We are encouraged to live within the customs and laws of our societies as good citizens. The above quote is the most famous in our scripture relating to this, however it is part of a treatise sent by Nichiren (the 13^th century sage whose teachings we follow) to the authorities of the time in Japan, in which he explained in no uncertain terms the governmental errors that had led to Japan’s dire state of poverty and suffering at the time. It led to the persecution of Nichiren and his followers. The lay organisation I am part of was founded in the 1930s and its leaders were similarly imprisoned and persecuted during the Second World War for speaking out against the actions of Japan’s militaristic regime.

We thus have a long history of speaking out when our conscience dictates, since Nichiren Buddhism teaches that it is wrong to remain silent when confronted with injustice as to do so is tantamount to supporting and condoning evil. We have to speak out with impassioned words resolutely attacking abuses of power that cause people suffering. We must say what needs to be said no matter whom we are addressing with courage, never trying to curry favour.

At a personal level the recent wars in Afghanistan and Iraq have been a challenge in this regard. As well as taking part in marches, it has led me to support the organisation Conscience which campaigns for citizens to have the right to direct the component of their tax spent on war, towards non violent means of conflict resolution. Part of this campaign has been supporting those refusing to pay that part of their tax spent on war (i.e. supporting those committing a crime). If I were single with no children I may well have decided not to pay myself. Such action is not to be taken lightly, and needs to be based on profound prayer. We should perhaps not forget that Gandhi and others who fought for social change deliberately broke laws on occasion. Without their courageous action the world would be a worse place.

(1) Nagasena’s retort to The philosopher king Menander. See Ikeda, D. (1978) Buddhism the First Millennium New York: Kodansha International Press.

(3) Nichiren Buddhism: Our religious practice is chanting the mantra ‘Nam myoho renge kyo’ as a method for helping to reveal our Buddhahood. ‘Nam’ is a Sanskrit word meaning ‘to commit one’s life to’, ‘Myoho renge kyo’ is the Chinese title of the Lotus Sutra (the Buddha’s highest teaching). Enlightenment/Nirvana is not seen as literal escape from the cycle of birth and death. Instead it is seen as correctly understanding the true nature of life & thus no longer experiencing hopelessness within the cycle of life as we face its challenges. For more info see www.sgi.org, www.sgi-uk.org, www.sgi-usa.org.

(4) Translated by Watson, B (1993) The Lotus Sutra. Chap 20 New York: Columbia University Press.

(5) Translated by The Gosho Translation Committee (1999) p851-2 Writings of Nichiren Daishonin Tokyo: Soka Gakkai

(6) Translated by Watson, B (1993) The Lotus Sutra. Chap2 New York: Columbia University Press.

(8) Translated by The Gosho Translation Committee (1999) p6 Writings of Nichiren Daishonin Tokyo: Soka Gakkai

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

In traditional Judaism, everything in this world comes from G-d. There is no such thing as secularism. Thus, justice emanates from G-d as well.

2) The Torah (the Pentateuch) is G-d’s word and therefore teaches us about Justice. Some relevant verses:

a) You shall not follow the masses in doing evil, nor shall you testify in a dispute so as to turn aside after a multitude in order to pervert justice; nor shall you be partial to a poor man in his dispute. (Exodus 22: 2-3)

b) You shall not commit a perversion of justice; you shall not favor the poor and you shall not honor the great; with righteousness shall you judge your fellow. (Leviticus 19:15)

These verses deal with human nature. People have a tendency to follow the majority and to respond emotionally when it comes to justice. Justice is not absolute. When discussing punishments the Torah does recognize the difference between intentional and unintentional killing of a person. (For intentional murder, see Numbers 35:16; Numbers 35:17; Numbers 35:18; Numbers 35:19; Numbers 35:21; Numbers 35:30, and for cities of refuge see Numbers 35:6, Numbers 35:11; Numbers 35:13 Numbers 35:14). However, subjective factors such as age, gender, social class, and family history should not be a factor in determining guilt or innocence.

Judges and officers shall you appoint in all your cities – which the Lord your G-d, gives you – for your tribes; and they shall judge the people with righteous judgment. You shall not pervert judgment, you shall not respect someone’s presence, and you shall not accept a bribe for the bribe will blind the eyes of the wise and make just words crooked. Justice, justice shall you pursue, so that you will live and possess the Land that the Lord your G-d, gives you. (Deuteronomy 16:18-20)

Without appointed judges, there cannot be justice. However, like everyone else, judges are susceptible to carry out injustice. Thus the Torah points out how important integrity is for judges. Note the words “blind the eyes of the wise,” and “make just words crooked.” Not even a wise or just person is automatically impartial. It is even possible that these wise people should be held to a higher standard because they “should know better.”

To many Jews, Deuteronomy 16:18 is a key verse of the whole bible. We are commanded as moral people to pursue justice in our lives, even when this is difficult or dangerous. For example, many rabbis used this verse as justification to march with Martin Luther King when it was not popular among most white Americans. The Talmud even goes so far as to suggest that we should actively go out in order to find opportunities to pursue justice (see Sanhedrin 32b and Kiddushin. 40a).

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

I speak tonight as a lawyer involved in the criminal justice system for the past 35 years for the defence, but largely as a Crown Prosecutor. I am also a committed Christian and a Lay Reader in the Church of England. I believe that it is the calling of every Christian to hunger and thirst for justice.

To understand what the Christian Faith teaches us about justice it is necessary to understand that the Christian perspective is one that encompasses the past, the present and the future. Equally it is necessary to understand that Christianity has its roots in Judaism, and that within what Christians regard as ‘the Word’. [The Bible] and the Old Testament is as important as the New Testament in revealing God’s purposes, and his Son, Jesus Christ.

PAST

Within the Old Testament there is an unfolding story of the relationship between God and man. Two central themes run through the Old and New Testaments concerning justice: the first is God’s all encompassing love, concern and mercy for all human beings; and the second is my responsibility to love God which we evidence by caring for others and as part of that care being stewards of the creation, the natural world . It is our performance in that care by which we are measured. Throughout the Old Testament there are a succession of examples: first on an individual basis; and subsequently, at a national level where the actions of those who are faithful to that calling ,and those who are not, are scrutinised by God.

The Old Testament begins with an account of the first exercise of justice, which we know as the fall of man in the story of Adam and Eve. The judgement after God had exercised justice was ejection from the perfection of Eden. God, however, does not give up on human kind and seeks through a variety of ways to instil in human kind a desire to attain his standard of love, concern and mercy.

We move through stories of individuals [Abraham, Jacob, and Joseph] to the national and the selection of the Hebrew nation in Egypt as ‘God’s chosen people.’ They are given during the Exodus from Egypt a set of laws that set out [in negative terms] a social standard by which human kind should live and against which it can be judged.

It is interesting to note that the 10 commandments are the basis of the Western rule of law, and that following the Reformation in England, every church was compelled to display prominently those 10 commandments to be read and followed by local communities. The display boards only show the bullet point headings, however, of God’s commandments in the Old Testament, since the church walls would not have been able to display the extent of the laws set out in the book of Deuteronomy. Just as the negative tends to attract the headlines in today’s media, behind those headline laws lay a great deal more that spoke of love and concern. The best example of this is probably the concept of the year of Jubilee in which property is to be returned to the family of the original owner. This was suggested to occur every 50 years [if it ever did]. Other positive laws provide for food for foreigners or friends and widows, sharing of one tenth of the harvest and the cancellation of debts every 7 years. {Deuteronomy 24 19-22, 14 28-29, 15 1-2 7-11]

Much of the Old Testament teaching on justice is found in the Prophets, Isaiah and Jeremiah principally, who lived and moved in worlds where the commandments were being ignored and the caring laws were simply not being observed. The exercise of justice, the judgement of God, was recognised in the defeat and exile of his people, and their return to slavery. Isaiah however ushers in our ‘present’, when he explores the concept of the coming Messiah. In his prophecy he uses the language of the Magnificat [itself based on earlier recognition of the effect of Gods action in our lives] in talking of role reversal and the care of those in need. [Isaiah 58: 6 and 10] [Isaiah 42]

PRESENT

As I indicated earlier, the justice ethic of Jesus is built upon a foundation of Hebrew scripture. Jesus had a special sense of mission to poor and oppressed people. He repeatedly reached out to those at the bottom of the social pyramid to the poor, women, Samaritans, lepers, children, prostitutes and tax collectors. He was prepared to accept all, but he made it clear that all needed to repent. He redefined the meaning of the word neighbour. He restated ‘all the law and the prophets’ to provide a simple standard, love God, love your neighbour. [Matthew 5 and verse 44]

The Christian understanding of justice has to be built on the divine act of salvation through the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ. For Christians believe that justice no longer resides in the book, or a set of laws, but in a person.

For the present then, our search for justice should be lived out and seen in lives of service to others, particularly the poor and oppressed. For the Christian this is a response to the Cross, to the sacrifice made for us.

Sadly History is littered with our failure, and we continue to create further examples of our failure to understand the nature of Christian justice.

THE FUTURE

We believe that in the future we will stand before Christ as the administrator of justice. When we come to that day of justice, Jesus pictured people from all nations gathered before him and the standard by which justice is administered is whether or not we have fed and cared for the lowliest of our neighbours (Matthew 25:31 paraphrased). Justice is then exercised by One who has suffered the ultimate injustice.

Our search for, and exercise of justice is not just on a personal ‘one to one’ basis. Because we live in a democracy and elect a government of the people, it is also a national responsibility to bring about justice, nationally and globally. As Christian citizens we should use the power of our citizenship to influence governments to seek justice at home and abroad.

Some of you will have heard this story, said to be true, about the Senior Criminal Judge, who saw in the dock before him a man with whom he had been friends at school many years earlier and who had fallen from grace. After establishing that the defendant was content for him to deal with the case, he considered the facts of the case and imposed a substantial fine. In doing so he exercised justice through the powers of the statute under which the offence had been committed. He then went to the Fines Office, and paid the fine on his old friends behalf.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

The concept of justice or ‘Adl’ in Arabic is one of the main pillars of Islam. The Holy Qur’an consistently reiterates the need for justice in every sphere of a Muslim’s life. In one verse it states:

‘O you who believe! Stand out firmly for justice, as witness to God, even as against yourselves, or your parents, or your kin, and whether it be (against) rich or poor: for God best protects both. Follow not the lusts (of your heart), lest you swerve, and if you distort (justice) or decline to do justice, verily God is well-acquainted with all that you do’. (Chapter iv, 135).

Justice or ‘Adl’ is the very foundation of true Muslim society and it is regarded as the core notion on which the entire House of Islam is built. One of God’s attributes in the Qur’an is ‘Al-adil’ meaning the one who is ‘just’ and Muslims faith is based on observing justice. In other words, the Islamic concept of justice is very different from the distributive and remedial justice advocated by Aristotle, the natural justice of British common law and the formal justice of Roman law because the Islamic concept of justice revolves around the belief that all our actions, however small or big, are being watched and recorded by the our Creator. Nothing is hidden from His sight and knowledge. He is fully aware of each and every step we take. The Holy Qur’an clearly informs all Muslims, ‘When you judge among men, judge with justice’. (Chapter iv, 58) elsewhere the Qur’an states, ‘If you judge, judge in equity between them. For God loves those who judge in equity’. (Chapter 5, verse 45).

The most hated person in the sight of God is the one’s who deliberately distorts justice and thereby makes a mockery of law and justice. The prophet Muhammad (peace be on him) said, ‘Of all the people, the closest and dearest person to God on the day of judgement will be the just leader; and the worst of men in the eyes of God and who will remain far removed from him will be the unjust’. He also said, ‘O you who believe! Stand out firmly for God as witnesses to justice, and let not the enmity of others incite you to act contrary to justice. Be always just, that is next to piety. Be mindful of your duty to God’.

It is clear that the core message of Islam revolves around justice, fairness and equality between all people. It is very unfortunate that a large number of Muslim societies today fail to reflect the core principles and values of Islam this truly beautiful religion and way of life. Islam is an Arabic word which means attaining peace by submitting to the will of One God.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sikhism is a young religion that started in India only 500 years ago. . From 1469 within the birth of its founder Guru Nanak Dev to Guru Gobind Singh in 1708 Ten Gurus guided its development. It’s an independent revealed religion; its core belief is that there is only One God. As the fifth largest religion it is now vibrant worldwide, (presence of 22 million). Sikhs live in God’s Will and the teachings from their Holy Book Guru Granth Sahib Ji.

The messages of Sikhs is simple yet Direct. TRUTH is HIGH, HIGHER yet is TRUTHFUL LIVING. The Guru Manter (Shabad of the Guru which is to be uttered with the tongue and with the mind) is VAHEGURU which means WONDERFUL GOD. Our Guru explains that just as the lotus flower is not affected by water and always remains much above its surface, similarly a mortal can live in the world with his own family, detached from Maya. By meditating upon and repeating the Word Shebad (VAHEGURU). He can easily gain unity with the Almighty God. All religions teach Peace, Forgiveness and Justice, so does Sikhism. Sikhs’ actions are recorded by two angels Chitr and Gupt, who pass on deeds to Dharm Raj and on our judgement day in heaven justice is done. God is God of Love and shows mercy.

When Sikhs choose to be “baptised” (take Amrit), they have to lead a pure and disciplined way of Life. The Khalsa (the community of the pure) was created by the 10^th Guru Gobind Singh Ji in 1699. They showed that by being baptised, leading a disciplined way of life, and following the Gurus’ teachings you can obtain a spiritual and eternal life. Baptised Sikhs are ordered to bathe in the early hours of the morning, recite 5 set prayers, meditate in God’s name for 1 and a half hours in the evening, and wear their 5 Ks (Kesh uncut long hair; Kanga the wooden comb; Kara, steel bracelet; Kirpan, small sheathed dagger; Keshera, long undershorts). When a baptized Sikh does something wrong they have to go to the Panj Pyara, the 5 beloved ones, by whom they were baptized, and confess and ask for their forgiveness.

The Khanda, the symbol of the Sikhs, has three symbols in one. The name is derived from the central Khanda , the double-edged sword in the centre, which expresses belief in the freedom and justice of the One, True God. The Chakra, the circle, represents belief in the Oneness and Infiniteness of God and reminds Sikhs to live within God’s rule and care. The two Kirpans, the swords, symbolise spiritual and worldly power and remind Sikhs to serve God. The Kirpan that is worn by the baptised Sikhs is the symbol of Power and of Freedom of Spirit. It reminds Sikhs to fight if necessary for truth and justice and to protect the weak.

There are three rings of protection around Sikhs. The first are the 5K’s, then the five institutions, lastly the five ideologies – democracy, human rights, equality between the sexes, social justice and freedom of conscience.

Prabjot Kaur 2004

Sikh Faith Statement

This statement was compiled under the guidance of Sri Singh Sahib Manjit Singh, the Jathedar of Anandapur, who is one of the five spiritual and temporal heads of Sikhism; and Sri Akhal Takhat Sahib, his deputy.

The Sikh scripture, Guru Granth Sahib, declares that the purpose of human beings is to achieve a blissful state and to be in harmony with the earth and all creation. It seems, however, that humans have drifted away from that ideal. For the earth is today saturated with problems. It is agonizing over the fate of its inhabitants and their future! It is in peril as never before. Its lakes and rivers are being choked, killing its marine life. Its forests are being denuded. A smoky haze envelops the cities of the world. Human beings are exploiting human beings.

The Sense of Crisis

There is a sense of crisis in all parts of the world, in various countries and among various peoples. The demands of national economic growth and individual needs and desires are depleting the natural resources of the earth.

There is serious concern that the earth may no longer be a sustainable biosystem. The major crises facing the earth—the social justice crisis and the environmental crisis—together are heading the earth toward a disastrous situation. The social justice crisis is caused by humanity’s confrontation with itself and the environmental crisis is caused by humanity’s confrontation with nature.

The social justice crisis is that poverty, hunger, disease, exploitation, and injustice are widespread. There are economic wars over resources and markets.

The rights of the poor and the marginal are violated. Women, constituting half the world’s population, have their rights abused.

The environmental crisis caused by humanity’s exploitation of nature is leading to the depletion of renewable resources, destruction of forests, and overuse of land for agriculture and habitation. Today pollution is contaminating air, land, and water. Smoke from industries, homes, and vehicles is in the air. Industrial waste and consumer trash is affecting streams and rivers, ponds and lakes. Much of the waste is a product of modern technology; it is not biodegradable and not reusable, and its long-term consequences are unknown. The viability of many animal and plant species, and possibly that of the human species itself, is at stake.

A Sikh Solution

This crisis cries out for an immediate and urgent solution. The crisis requires going back to the basic question of the purpose of human beings in this universe and an understanding of ourselves and God’s creation.

We are called to the vision of Guru Nanak which is a World Society comprising God- conscious human beings who have realized God. To these spiritual beings the earth and the universe are sacred; all life is unity, and their mission is the spiritualization of all.

Guru Nanak and his successors during their lifetime worked toward creating an ideal society that has as its basis spiritual awareness and ethical integrity. The name “Sikh” means disciple or learner of the Truth.

Guru Nanak in his philosophy states that the reality that humans create around themselves is a reflection of their inner state. The current instability of the natural system of the earth—the external environment of human beings—is only a reflection of the instability and pain within humans. The increasing barrenness of the earth’s terrain is a reflection of the emptiness within humans.

The solution to problems manifest in our world lies in prayer and in accepting God’s hukam. It is difficult to translate certain Sikh concepts accurately. Hukam is one such concept—it may be best described as a combination of God’s will, order, and system. With an attitude of humility, and surrender to the Divine Spirit, conscientious human beings can seek to redress the current crises of the environment and of social justice. In the Sikh Way this is done through the guidance of the Guru, who is the Divine Master and messenger of God.

The Gurus taught humans to be aware of and respect the dignity in all life, whether human or not. Such a respect for life can only be fostered where one can first recognize the Divine spark within oneself, see it in others, cherish it, nurture and fulfil it.

Such a person is involved in human problems and society and has to prove his or her effectiveness there. Such a person lives with a mission—and works for the emancipation of all. A true Sikh is for individual human rights, the environment, and justice for all.

“The God-conscious person is animated with an intense desire to do good in this world.” (273)

Over the last three centuries the members of the Khalsa order have stood up for the rights of the oppressed and the disenfranchised even at the cost of their own lives. The Khalsa vision of the World Society is:

“Henceforth such is the Will of God: No man shall coerce another; No person shall exploit another; Each individual has the inalienable birthright to seek and pursue happiness and self-fulfillment; Love and persuasion is the only law of social coherence.” (74)

For the Khalsa, justice requires the participation and inclusion of all in obtaining and enjoying the fruits of God’s creation. Justice achieved through cooperative effort is desirable. The ideal for the Khalsa is to strive for justice for all, not merely for themselves.

The institutions of sangat, pangat, and langar

The Sikh Gurus, through their lives, provided role models for the Sikhs. They all actively worked to stress the equality of all humans and challenged the rigid social stratification of the caste system in India. The very existence of the Sikh religion is based on challenging:

q Exploitation of the poor and the marginal by the religious and political establishment.

Sikh Gurus provided many examples of standing by their principles and confronting exploitation and oppression.

Sikh Gurus also moulded traditional lifestyles to exemplify a more equitable society. They created many institutions that form the basis of Sikh society and are based on the equality of all. The Sikh Gurus invited people of all castes and creeds to meditate together. That would be called sangat. Either before or after the meditation, people were asked to sit and eat together irrespective of their social background, to create a sense of equality. That process would be called pangat.

Sikh Gurus started a tradition of free distribution of food to the rich or poor through the Sikh meeting areas. That would be called langar. Through the creation of the Khalsa, the Gurus established a system that would protect and maintain a free and just order.

Equality of women

Women and their rights have been ignored for too long. Any approach to solving problems of social justice and the environment must be sensitive to women’s concerns, and must include women as equals.

Conclusion

The ideal for Sikhism is a society based upon mutual respect and cooperation and providing an optimal atmosphere for individuals to grow spiritually. Sikhism regards a cooperative society as the only truly religious society, as the Sikh view of life and society is grounded in the worth of every individual as a microcosm of God. Therefore, an individual must never be imposed upon, coerced, manipulated, or engineered:

”If thou wouldst seek God, demolish and distort not the heart of any individual”. (1384)

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

We can explore the theme of justice from a top-down institutional perspective or at the level of individuals and social relations. Because of the limited time, I’m going to limit this presentation to the dynamics of justice at the individual level.

The Bahá’í Writings focus attention on a very important aspect of justice when they link justice to independence of thought and an individual’s search for truth.

In the beautiful Hidden Words of Bahá’u’lláh – the founder of the Bahá’í faith – we find the following:

The best beloved of all things in My sight is Justice; turn not away therefrom if thou desirest Me, and neglect it not that I may confide in thee. By its aid thou shalt see with thine own eyes and not through the eyes of others, and shalt know of thine own knowledge and not through the knowledge of thy neighbour. Ponder this in thy heart; how it behooveth thee to be. Verily justice is My gift to thee and the sign of My loving-kindness. Set it then before thine eyes.”

Justice is a gift of human beings. With justice we can enjoy independence of thought and pursue our individual search for truth. Justice and fairness require that all human beings enjoy education, so that they have the confidence and know-how to discover their own path in life. Indeed, knowledge is one of the wondrous gifts of human existence. It allows us to think for ourselves, to reach our own conclusions, and to enjoy dignity and choice.

If we are imbued with justice we would choose for our neighbour what we would choose for ourselves. Humility is a much forgotten virtue in our day and age, but a sense of justice and fairness encourages humility and rejects selfishness and pride. Justice therefore encourages the sense of sharing and goodwill, and its purpose is to bring about unity amongst us all.

As well as practicing justice amongst ourselves, we should encourage it amongst those in leadership positions. The Bahá’í Writings refer to justice as a light that can envelop the whole earth. There is a need for justice to rule amongst humanity in order to counter tyranny and injustice. The light of justice would transform our world both at the individual and the social level.

“Take heed that your words be purged from idle fancies and worldly desires and your deeds be cleansed from craftiness and suspicion. Dissipate not the wealth of your precious lives in the pursuit of evil and corrupt affection, nor let your endeavours be spent in promoting your personal interest. Be generous in your days of plenty, and be patient in the hour of loss. Adversity is followed by success and rejoicings follow woe.”

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

You might say that I’m contributing my paper under false pretences. Firstly, although the Suffolk Humanist group, Suffolk Humanists, is affiliated to SIFRE, we wouldn’t describe Humanism as a ‘faith’. Faith is defined as ‘a strong belief in something, especially without proof’, or ‘a specific system of religious beliefs’. It’s also defined as having complete confidence or trust in something, but since Humanists are essentially sceptics, we’re not inclined to have faith in anything that isn’t proven. Humanism is an approach to life for people who live without religion and who care about right and wrong.

Secondly, we would not presume to ‘teach’ anyone anything, since we have no book of rules, and no secular equivalent of clergy, imams, rabbis and the like to convey Humanist teachings. There is no Humanist party line on justice, any more than there is on many other things. However, we do encourage people to think rationally about their rights and responsibilities, and to see themselves as accountable to for their actions.

Therefore, this paper is a personal reflection from a Humanist who’s thought about justice and what it means. It is not intended to be a comprehensive review of Humanism and justice. Many Humanists would agree with me about some, if not all, of this; others might differ. One of the distinctive things about being a Humanist is thinking for oneself. Some might say that Humanism is a cop-out, since we’re not required to follow any set of rules. This is nonsense. We seek the best in and for human beings, and the advancement of humanity by its own efforts, so we give much thought to doing the right thing in whatever circumstances we find ourselves in, which, we would argue, is actually more difficult than following a set creed.

Justice is the administration of law according to prescribed and accepted principles. Aristotle said, ‘All virtue is summed up in dealing justly.’ The ancient principle of ‘due process’ is based on an individual’s right to a fair and public trial, properly conducted, the right to be heard at his or her trial, and the right to an impartial hearing. It also means that laws must be framed so that any reasonable person might understand them.

We might also say that just laws should not reflect ignorance and prejudice, such as the law that criminalised homosexuality until recently, and that they should be relevant to the way we live now, not decades or hundreds of years ago. There are many laws on the statute books that should have been repealed long ago. For example; a few years ago, a male body was discovered in a Woodbridge park. It had been dead so long that it was impossible to tell the cause of death, though it was probably natural. The person who’d dumped it was a close relative who must have kept it at home for a long time, for peculiar reasons. The only offence the police could find to charge him with, due to a lack of evidence, came from an ancient ecclesiastical statute – failing to give the body a Christian burial. A local journalist contacted me for comment, since I’ve conducted lots of non-religious funerals. Did this mean that all the people who’d arranged secular funerals for their relatives had been breaking the law? No one was going to bother prosecuting them, as this particular law was no longer considered relevant – except when it came in useful in the body in the park case.

Institutions of law are essential in any civilised society, yet they enshrine injustice. One of the framers of the American Constitution, Thomas Jefferson, wrote, ‘Laws and institutions must go hand in hand with the progress of the human mind,’ yet in modern America, the neo-conservatives are impeding progress and even reversing it. Americans still claim their constitutional ‘right to bear arms’ and powerful evangelical Christians impose their views on abortion and sex education on everyone through legislation. In Saudi Arabia and other Middle Eastern countries, Islamic sharia law is being used to impose a medieval version of ‘justice’. This is a misuse of power.

Gene Roddenberry, the American who wrote the original Star Trek TV series, expressed some fundamental Humanist principles through his stories. Conflict resolution was achieved through negotiation, not force. Equality was a principle underlying the organisation of the star ship Enterprise – equality of gender, race and so on. Similar principles are enshrined in the United Nations Charter of Human Rights, which begins with the words ‘Whereas recognition of the inherent dignity and of the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family is the foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world…’ and goes on, in article 3, to state, ‘Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person.’ We’ve a very long way to go before these ideals are achieved for everyone, everywhere. One obstacle is nationalism. As long as some countries – including America, the most powerful country in the world – resist the imposition of fundamental principles of justice by an international criminal court, they’ll continue to get away with murder, and more.

The current governments in Great Britain and America are perhaps the most religious they’ve been for a long time, and religious politicians are abusing their positions to impose their beliefs on us. Religion should not play any part in either politics or the law, which should be entirely secular. It’s illogical to enshrine belief, or faith, in a justice system. People have faith without evidence, yet evidence is fundamental to the law. People of faith should enjoy the same rights as everyone else, but there must be equality. There are, in any case, so many different faiths, and they all seem to contradict one another. The law must not permit special privileges for religious people. One does not need a faith or religious belief to be a good person, yet this is a common assumption, despite the evidence for all the cruelty and injustice perpetrated in the name of religion. Humanists want a level playing field, which means, for example, that religious ceremonial should not play any part in the rituals and traditions of the judiciary, the military or government at any level. Such practices are old-fashioned and discriminatory. It makes it much harder for an atheist to become Prime Minister, for example, and almost impossible for an atheist to become President of the United States.

Here are some of the ways that Humanists or secularists have influenced the law in this country.

The National Secular Society (of which I’m a member) was founded in 1866 by Charles Bradlaugh, who was elected MP for Northampton in 1880. It was usual then for MPs to swear a religious oath on the Bible when entering Parliament. Bradlaugh asked to be allowed to substitute a secular affirmation but was refused, despite the support of the Prime Minister, William Gladstone. Because he wouldn’t swear a religious oath he was not permitted to take his seat in the House of Commons, it was declared vacant, and a by-election was called. At one stage, he was arrested by the Sergeant at Arms for attempting to take his seat. However, after he was re-elected several times, he was finally allowed to take his seat in 1886. It would be interesting to know how many of the witnesses who swear the traditional oath on the Bible in court are actually religious, and how many realise that they can make a secular affirmation. Perjury (meaning lying on oath) is rightly a very serious offence, as it’s crucial to establish the truth in court, yet it could be argued that very many witnesses perjure themselves before they begin, by swearing an oath that’s meaningless to an atheist, agnostic, or non-theist (such as a Buddhist).

Humanists were actively involved in the campaign to reform abortion law through the Abortion Law Reform Association, resulting in the passing of the Abortion Act of 1967. Not all Humanists are happy about abortion, but most would prefer women to have abortions carried our safely in hospital, rather than risk dangerous back street abortions, which are still common elsewhere. Most Humanists are in favour of legalising voluntary euthanasia (as is a majority of the British public), and many support the Voluntary Euthanasia Society. The subject is currently under review by a House of Lords Select Committee.

Humanist organisations, including the British Humanist Association and the National Secular Society, have contributed to parliamentary consultations over issues like free school transport (when children attending religious schools have been given preferential treatment) and the legal requirement for schools to have collective worship, which is unpopular, impractical and often flouted. The most recent legal statement of the requirements for collective worship (as distinct from assembly) is contained in the School Standards and Framework Act 1998.

Humanists across Europe have been campaigning to keep religion out of the new European Constitution. We think that faith organisations already have more than enough privileged access to government and that existing laws cover most of the issues they complain about.

In May 2002, Lord Avebury introduced a Religious Offences Bill, which aimed to abolish the common law against blasphemy and miscellaneous obsolete laws about religious offences. It also proposed a new law against incitement to religious hatred. We want the abolishment of the law of blasphemy, which some faiths would like extended, but have concerns about the proposed new offence of incitement to religious hatred. The issue is complicated and there’s a lot of potential for misuse of a badly framed law. Some of us are concerned, for example, about the possibility of its use to punish causing ‘offence’ as some religionists are easily offended and we are keen to maintain the principle of free speech, even when it’s used to express opinions we loathe, such as extreme nationalism.

In an ideal world, courts of law should be places where experienced and impartial minds can consider the merits of each case and offer practical ways of dealing with them. However imperfect the system may be, it’s preferable to the alternatives – arbitrary tyranny, corruption, gun law, chance, or trial by tabloid. If we haven’t broken any just law, we have nothing to fear. The Greek philosopher Epicurus wrote, ‘It is impossible for someone who secretly does something that mankind has agreed is harmful, to be confident that he will escape detection, even if he escapes it ten thousand times. Until he dies, he will always be uncertain of remaining undetected.’ And if he’s detected, let justice prevail.