Before considering social justice, it is important to understand why it matters. Social justice is a powerful idea in today's society, but its origins and meanings are partially unclear. There is perhaps little, if any, doubt about the importance of this question among people in rich and poor countries. The following research regarding what I will talk about in this essay is about the concept of justice in relation to the issues and impact of justice as reducing the balance between rich and poor. Next the general concept of justice will appeal to my fairness thesis. Since this meaning is not controversial, it will demonstrate that the indecent patterns embodied in developing countries require another way of dealing with justice between rich and poor nations. However, in today's gig economy this is not the case for case studies that allow us to try to bring out the possibilities and limits of social justice and what can be achieved to make it a better outcome. It also talks about established conventions and principles about what society is doing to protect individuals who need to sustain their conditions. It also defines detailed definitions as opposed to the fact that each definition is simply different since from the perspective of the person in rich and poor countries, such as social justice and equity, each word described has its own meaning. However, no one can deny that the gap between rich and poor is becoming increasingly wider. Throughout the essay I also concluded that a distributive justice framework has to do with fairness, but on the contrary it is said to be successful but still criticized. It is even argued that social justice is perceived as protecting individuals by ensuring that they are treated fairly. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an Original Essay The definition established by Susan Torres offers a useful starting point to explain the individual key elements of each word as opposed to the context within this definition under international law. As stated, social justice is the fundamental key to enhancing equity and fairness in resources, rights and treatment of marginalized individuals and groups of people, who do not share the same power in society due to their immigration, race, ethnicity, age, socioeconomic. , religious heritage, physical ability, or status groups based on sexual orientation'. As before clearly being a member of society, every member deserves to have all the same rights, opportunities and equity within it because the key components and aspects of social justice have entirely to do with the fairness of society. Therefore, it is concluded that it is the very essence of all great spiritual teachings throughout society and without justice there can be no greater justice. To some extent, it is even trying to create a society where all members can lead a fulfilling life and have access to all institutions before helping members of society realize the potential in the community. Beyond that, the meaning of justice is captured quite well in a more familiar term, because social justice takes the central idea of ​​justice as fairness, and fairness has often been used to refer to the ability to judge without reference to one's feelings or interests and can be highly debated and is defined differently depending on whether it is from the point of view of the rich or the poor. The law is moderately a distinctive tool as it can both increase and decrease legal assistance. A particular example oflaw that reduces legal aid is the Equality Act 2010 which legally protects individuals from segregation in the workplace and in society at large. However, there are numerous cases in which this is not provided for by the law that protects individuals from discrimination. However, people continue to be segregated. For example, women may not get a job because they became pregnant mothers and subsequently took paid leave. On top of that, there is still a pay gap between men and women and, in essence, they should be entitled to equal pay. It is very common for the gender pay gap to be a potential topic of interest as, despite its reduction in the UK, it is still suggested to still be in favor of men. However, as indicated in the UK, men are said to earn more than women, as indicated by national statistics, and therefore equality law must work on the basis that in April 2017, the sex pay gap for representatives full time dropped to 9.1. % as in 1997 was 17.4% as indicated by the ONS. Although it has decreased over time, it has not yet decreased on a social level because people are not treated similarly and instead are negatively discriminated against to this day. In R (SG) v Secretary of state for work and pensions (2015) UKSC 16, (2015) 1 WLR 1449, the question was whether capping the benefit was justifiable. The cap limits the total family income from social benefits to a fixed sum, regardless of the family's subsistence needs. The parties agree that this was implicitly prejudiced against women. Lady Hale said what needs to be considered is whether the benefit cap applies to lone parents and can be justified independently of its discriminatory effects. Considering this, Lady Hale concluded that the limit will deprive children of their basic needs which may not be in their best interests and therefore the indirect sex discrimination inherent in the implementation of the limit is not a proportionate way of achieving its objectives. Therefore, those who were most adversely affected were single guardians with at least 3 or more children living in generally expensive rental accommodation. They were negatively affected by the fact that they were less likely to escape the impact of the roof and move to a new home and find a job. The vast majority of these lone guardians were women and statistics have shown that 90% of lone guardians are women in the UK. It has also been seen that agreements representing those working in the gig economy are an example of new models of labor exploitation and authoritative commitments in common law. . And they have the feeling that they will no longer be able to deliver justice, as demonstrated by Uber and Deliveroo. These two organizations could control business law to their advantage, Uber workers are classified as independent workers working in a gig economy with a view to adaptable working hours as they have little to no company security or guarantee. Looking at the discussion of social justice in relation to distributive justice in a national and international context, distributive justice is more concerned with the fair allocation of resources among different members of a community. The principles in this regard are normative principles designed to allocate goods in limited supply relative to demand. The principles vary based on the assets subject to distribution, income, wealth, opportunities, the nature of the subjects of distribution and the basis of the assets distributed. One of the simplest principles of distributive justice is thatof rigorous or radical equality. The principle even says that every person should have the same level of goods and services. However, distributive justice is best thought of as providing moral guidance for the political processes and structures that influence the distribution of benefits and burdens in societies. In addition to this, the UN often defines poverty as a vicious circle consisting of a series of associated factors that make it difficult to overcome. Instead, many societies prevent individuals from enjoying their rights simply based on who they are or cannot afford them. Discriminatory laws, policies and practices may suggest that these groups are even denied the right to high standards of health, work and adequate housing. Within the case study the concept of social justice can have an impact as laws can influence citizens' opportunities for freedom. Laws similarly control provision and influence whether or not goods such as education, healthcare, and housing are accessible to people based on their race, ethnicity, age, socioeconomic, religious, physical ability, or sexual orientation . To the extent that laws discriminate against people based on their membership in a particular social gathering, they have a substantial impact not only on who but how people can embody and express their personhood, but equally can influence whether they can arrive to social benefits that address converging types of poverty. Beyond that, what happens also relates to refugees and has more to do with an individual who is given security of protection. Therefore, asylum seekers become refugees when the immigration authority decides on the outcome whether the individual falls within the international definition of a refugee. In addition to this, international law states that for an individual to become a refugee, he or she must clearly have met the criteria for refugee status, as set out in the 1951 convention article. International and European law on the basis of refugees is an example of socially just law and a measure aimed at reducing the balance between rich and poor, claiming the law is offering asylum seekers and refugees the possibility of a superior life by allowing them to live in their country of origin, if their life is endangered in their country of origin. The Dublin Regulation is a measure of European law that does this. Article 6(4) of Regulation (EU) No. 604/2013 states that in a State where an unaccompanied minor has submitted an asylum request, the best interests of the minor must be protected. The law instantly promotes social justice because it takes into account the prosperity and best interests of the child above all else. Article 31 of the 1951 Convention even provides that refugees are protected against sanctions for illegal entry. The law includes human rights and also promotes social justice and sustainability as it ensures that people who are in danger or at risk by helping them relocate to a safe country. Furthermore, whether the applicant's countries of origin are "safe", can be assessed by examining the definition contained in Annex I of the Procedures Directive, which establishes that, taking into account: the legal situation of a country, the application of the law to Within a democratic system and general political circumstances…there is generally and consistently no persecution…, no torture or inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, and no threat of indiscriminate violence in situations of international or internal armed conflict. Although the article of the 1951 Convention establishes the obligation on States totreat refugees without discrimination on the basis of their nation of origin, the Asylum Procedures Directive and its recast have allowed EU nations to divide asylum seekers into various categories, with nationals of some third countries justifying treatment less favorable procedural than others. This could raise underlying tensions with the obligation to consider the Convention as the foundation of refugee protection in the EU4 and to refrain from any clarification on EU refugee acquittals that would undermine it. According to Lady Hale's speech, the case study is entirely related as many infectious diseases kill millions of people every year, of which they are found in developing countries. The main cases of illnesses and deaths are found in Africa, Asia and the regions of South America which represent the global population affected by HIV/AIDS. The AIDS crisis has drawn particular attention to the way in which many people in the developing world appear unable to obtain the drugs that are supposed to cure disease or alleviate suffering. Consistently, more and more people are dying because of aid in this developing society. The situations behind this are due to the fact that the lack of access to essential medicines is multiple, however in many cases the high cost of medicines constitutes a particular barrier to necessary medicines or treatments. Due to excessive knowledge, drug prices are often due to strong intellectual property protection. For this reason, governments in developing countries try and try to lower the prices of medicines before suffering pressure from industrialized countries and pharmaceutical multinationals. As for WTO membership, this equates to lower tariffs, which means more money for the owner of the medicines. In this context, the World Trade Organization partially sets standards for the overall protection of intellectual property, including pharmaceutical patents, which have come under criticism due to the effects that increasing levels of patent protection will have on product prices. drugs. Medicines are vital to the survival of millions of people are already too expensive for most people in poor countries because the medicines are unaffordable, have become ineffective due to resistance, or are not sufficiently adapted to specific local conditions and constraints. The law, in contrast, does not will not provide a socially just outcome like those in less economically developed countries and will not have the ability to afford the cost of medicines from owners who have a monopoly due to the licenses required by travel. However, it protects the property rights of individuals so that individuals cannot protect their work so that no one else can assume recognition of it without the owner's consent. From this one could conclude that the Doha Declaration takes a big step towards ensuring that intellectual property protection serves the public interest and defines the options available to countries when the prices of existing patented medicines are too high to their populations. Furthermore, the law protects property more than it does, so people's lives are wasted due to patent laws being practiced. It can even be argued that law undermines social justice and that law will never be socially just compared to the current intellectual property system. However, when it comes to considering a different context such as human rights, the law continues to protect people as much as possible.