Justice, political ethics, and democracy. Assessing two levels of government

Abstract

Fiat iustitia ne pereat mundus, literally ‘Justice must be done so the world may not perish’. It is a famous Latin proverb that forms the basis of modern jurisprudence. Both in the original version, ’Fiat iustitia e pereat mundus’, implying, ‘Let justice be done, and even the world may perish’ – and in our adjusted version, justice must be at the basis of human society, at least in a democratic political system. However, what kind of justice is most congruent with today’s pluralist democracy? The one is grounded on ethical intersubjective a priori mediation or directly applied justice regardless of its consequences. How can today’s democracy and comprehensive doctrines be compatible with negotiating pluralism and gaining stability within Albania successfully? To answer the above questions, in this article, we will use John Rawls’ response, introduced in his 1993 book Political Liberalism. Furthermore, another goal of this article is to elucidate the Albanian politician’s ethics outlook. In this regard, a set of fundamental questions arise here. For example, why do our politicians act as they do? Is there e proper political way to act? To cope with these questions, we will analyze Max Weber’s essay Between Two Laws to grasp the current Leader’s type of ethics. Weber’s classification of the ethic of conviction and ethic of responsibility, and to what extent he prescribes each ethic to the ‘ideal politician’, will be at the heart of this line of reasoning The article proceeds into four key sections — the first deals with assessing the Leader’s political ethics in current Albania. The second section provides a parsimonious classification of the current state of Albania’s democracy; the third section offers a short analysis of the Socialist Party government, both central and local, whereas the last part provides a solution for democratic consolidation through the empowerment of the Constitution.