The Consequences of Ignoring Equity Principles in the 21st Century

Equity may be defined as the quality of being fair and impartial. Principles of equity, objectivity and fairness are vital to the functioning of the legal system, regardless of country, state, city or municipality concerned. Courts take great pains to analyze, study and apply these principles whenever decisions of consequence need to be made. This is evident from the long legal opinions issued by courts on controversial or serious legal issues in almost any country. Oftentimes it is the courts who serve as the last resort for those who feel they have been treated unfairly by the government or private actors. It is often the efficiency and effectiveness of a court applying equity principles which prevents mass revolts, civil strife and economic malaise. The courts are the last gatekeepers of justice and equity, and though legislators and rule makers should be applying these principles in their decision making as well, the courts exist to weed out any failures of government in this regard.

When the courts are inconsistent in applying equity principles, are limited in their authority to apply them fully or are otherwise unwilling to consider them as they should, distrust of the legal system can prevail, thereby paving the way for extra judicial means of recourse, such as protests and unrest. In addition, even when civil unrest does not occur, economic activity is sure to suffer when equity principles are ignored. Without a consistent set of rules for conduct in the economy, investors will not feel confident about doing business, due to a lack of knowledge about how the law will be applied. Distrust of institutions among business people is a hallmark of corrupt and bureaucratic economies. It is hard to encourage business people to invest when legal systems and rules are applied inconsistently, partially and erratically. If there are no rules to govern how invested capital will be protected, then business people will be unwilling to risk their saving when there is no promise of its preservation.

In the United States, the institution of slavery has left a lasting impact on black neighborhoods. Police brutality and wrongful incarceration are phenomena which have tarnished the reputation of the US legal system globally. Political and racial bias against African Americans has had wide reaching societal and economic impact as well. Due to racially discriminatory policies, many inner cities remain dilapidated and underdeveloped, despite the US boasting one of the largest economies in the world. Furthermore, the habit of inequitable decision making has carried over to all facets of society, and all racial groups. For example, health insurance and health care access remains to be a major issue for middle class Americans of all backgrounds. In the early stages of the pandemic, the US also faired the worst among developed nations, with the highest number of cases and deaths. This was mostly due to slow, inefficient, incompetent, and arguably inequitable decision making. The rich survived the pandemic very comfortably, while the poor and middle class have not faired as well.

A similar situation can be observed in India. India had recovered well from the first phase of the pandemic. After this recovery, political parties decided to apply the rules of “caution” brought about due to the pandemic rather selectively. Certain political actors were allowed to hold mass rallies, and private parties with a budget began to hold mass events, such as live sports. The end result was the destructive second wave of the pandemic which crippled the Indian economy, and crushed any hopes of recovery that were held by the people before.

There are countless other examples as well. In the Middle East, disputes over rights to territory have triggered conflict for centuries in Israel and Palestine. In the most recent installment of the conflict, evictions and property rights play a central role in the triggers for the strife. Personal status, national security, nationality and civil rights are unresolved issues which also exist in the background. Though a decision by the courts has not yet been made in the current installment of the crisis, civil strife and war has already begun. This demonstrates the gravity and weight which equity principles carry in society. Even before they are fully analyzed by courts, they have the ability to cause confusion, civil strife, war and destruction when they are not fully or expeditiously addressed in legal decision making. Therefore, government institutions and courts run the risk of facing grave consequences when they leave equity principles unaddressed.

Origins of Equity Principles

The origins of equity principles in the British Common Law system can be found in the division of English courts into general courts and courts of equity in the Middle Ages. The courts of equity were formed to deal with areas of the law which revolved around principles of fairness and which were of concern to common people, as opposed to purely commercial issues. Even the absolute monarchs of the Middle Ages realized that ignoring equity principles was detrimental to their claim to power. In modern common law and civil law countries, these courts have been merged into a central court system which handles equity matters as well as general legal claims.

Concepts of equity and fairness are also enshrined in the UN Declaration of Human Rights, which was brought about after the horrors of World War 2. Unfortunately, human memory fades quite quickly, and a number of principals enshrined in the declaration have not been fully implemented by many countries across the globe, such as freedom of movement, or equal rights for all citizens.

Challenges of the 21st Century

The speed of technological advance has been hard for courts to keep up with. Many social media and technology companies operate as semi-autonomous corporate nations, with their own set of rules and recourse mechanisms. Unfortunately, these entities exist to serve their own ruthless interest, and therefore do not make much room for the application of equity principles unless forced. In addition, ultra nationalist policies have become popularized by opportunistic politicians, looking to gain following and mass appeal quickly. This has led to even the judiciary becoming politicized in countries such as the United States, as was observed when Donald Trump rushed last year to confirm his Supreme Court nomination prior to the elections and his subsequent departure. All of these factors have hindered the consideration given to the analysis of equity principles in legal and government decision making.

Unfortunately, if courts and government actors do not find a way to keep up with technological progress and misuse, or are swayed by political interests, bureaucracy and corruption, then social strife, malaise and economic instability are likely to be a prevalent feature of life for some time to come. What government actors and legal decision makers should realize is that they will have to live their lives in the same strife driven environment as everyone else, and therefore suffer the consequences of their failures eventually. When infrastructure collapses, health crisis’s occur, or wars begin, no one remains safe.