There is Math Involved
The word “equal” usually means there is math involved.
I suppose I haven’t written how “equal” as a mathematical symbol is involved in
Article 7. All are equal before the law and are entitled without any discrimination to equal protection of the law.
All means both sides of the equation. So that basically means this:
citizens protected by the law = authors and implementors of the law are protected by the law
wherein “=” means equal protection. Both sides should be protected without any discrimination.
Where’s the math in that?
From what I understand, there cannot be equality in law and protection if there is no budget involved. That means, there are people who have to be paid to write, implement and uphold the law. Materials and equipment are needed to write, implement and uphold the law. Infrastructure are needed to (also) write, implement and uphold the law. And all of them incur a certain cost, both monetary and intangible such as time and opportunity.
The whole process of Human Resources Management is needed to ensure that the appropriate people are placed in position to write, implement and uphold the law. And in many instances, the reality is that when these people are not well compensated, then more often than not, there is lesser motivation to write, implement and uphold the law. Then this is where the negative type of writing, implementing and upholding the law comes into picture.
Newer and more updated and modern laws, or even laws to fill-in the loopholes in the existing laws may be delayed from being written because those who write it are either paid to delay writing them or don’t think they are paid enough to write any.
Implementing and upholding the law can easily be manipulated with the word equal. Such that it could become “The cost of paying those who implement and uphold the law so they wouldn’t is equal to a certain amount”. Also, the cost of preventing those who implement and uphold the law so they couldn’t do so is equal to zero. Which in simpler words would be “The cost of implementing and upholding the law according to the way I want it is equal to the amount they are willing to accept to let me have my way.”
Let’s look at it this way. Forensics is an important factor in implementing and upholding the law. But if there isn’t anyone qualified to do the forensics part expertly, and/or the equipment needed to do forensics is outdated or even non-existent, then there is the lack of equal protection of the law.
Even the simple equipment needed to implement and uphold the law such as a real camera, a desktop PC with the appropriate software and hardware and networking equipment, fingerprinting equipment, surveillance cameras, a detention or jail cell big enough for the existing crime population in a certain region for both genders with decent bathrooms, cellphones and walkie talkies, appropriate vehicles with complete safety and rescue devices or devices to apprehend wrong-doers, and so many more.
Then there is the constant and consistent training needed by the manpower who are hired to author, implement and uphold the law. Which also consists of piles and piles of books, manuals, audio-visuals, and various types of continuous documentation of the experiences of these people before, during and after their training in authoring, implementing and upholding the law. With the emergence of newer kinds of potential sources of wrong-doing such as in cyberspace, it would be a pity to pretend that they can provide the citizens protection by the law if they do not even have PCs or desktops or even know how to use them and the citizens know more than they do.
So I think that would be this equation.
Citizens ask for protection by the law is equal to
authors and implementors of the law use materials, equipment, infrastructure and manpower to prove that the citizen is indeed protected by the law
and they too are protected by the law in performing their work for they can always prove that whatever decisions are made, all angles have been exhausted.
And these costs are not something that should be asked from those who wrote Article 7. It is supposed to be the responsibility of whole countries. And only doable if people work together.
But there lies the vicious cycle, wherein math again is involved.
People pay taxes to provide the budget for the purchase of materials, equipment, infrastructure and the salary and benefits of the manpower needed to author, implement and uphold the law.
If the people cheat on the amount of taxes they pay, there would be less budget to make such purchases.
If the people pay them correctly, there is no assurance that it would be
Also, if those in charge of collecting and disbursing the taxes collected assign the money into budgets for items that ARE NOT for the purchase of materials, equipment, infrastructure and the salary and benefits of the manpower needed to author, implement and uphold the law, there would also be less budget to make such purchases.
And the worse of all, if there are existing budgets for the purchase of materials, equipment, infrastructure and the salary and benefits of the manpower needed to author, implement and uphold the law, but there are some people within the system who pocket them, then there would be less budget to no budget to make such purchases.
Vicious cycle. Pay taxes right, not pay taxes right? Spend budget correctly, not spend budget correctly, pocket budget?
And this is a vicious cycle that is not easily changed into a pleasant cycle. Possibly even have the most minute possibility of being changed into a pleasant cycle.
Which is why I think, the word “entitled” in “All are equal before the law and are entitled without any discrimination to equal protection of the law.” is not all encompassing. Because no matter how much we all try to make things right, only a selected few would be able to provide themselves with the appropriate materials, equipment, infrastructure and the salary and benefits of the manpower needed to author, implement and uphold the law.
So, for example, if someone had to be proven guilty or not guilty without a shadow of a doubt, it would not be completely possible if the evidence cannot be made to go through an eye of a needle, or every possible angle cannot be checked because there is a lack in the materials, equipment, infrastructure and the salary and benefits of the manpower needed to author, implement and uphold the law.
And this is why there are people who are assigned to continuously work to change the vicious cycle into a pleasant cycle. These people may be those who are under a payroll or simply people who can see things and would have the courage to share to others what they see, just in case someone could do something about it. And eventually pave the way for a more realistic way to change things.
Honestly, I think the discrimination lies in the people themselves. How? Here’s an example.
If two people whom you have known for the longest time approached you simultaneously, and both said he was punched on the face by the other, who would you believe? Would you make an instant conclusion and think that one is telling the truth based on your instinct or from the established personalities you have of them? Or would you practice forensics and standardized strategic questioning with them to find out the truth? Or would you even bother giving it a thought since you are not being paid to do so anyway?
How about this, would you bother understanding any of this if you think you have nothing to gain from understanding it? Or would you allow yourself to be bothered if someone paid you to do so?
Did you enjoy this post? Why not leave a comment below and continue the conversation, or subscribe to my feed and get articles like this delivered automatically to your feed reader.
Comments
No comments yet.
Leave a comment