The case study presents an interesting scenario that can be analyzed using rights-based ethics as a framework and procedural justice as a concept of choice. The case features five parties whose main focus is on a reported rape case that is not correctly investigated. Vic reports a rape case, but because she lives in a section of the city mainly inhabited by young ladies who are practicing prostitution; such as her neighbor Janice, the police officer who responds to her call does not take her seriously. The officer is skeptical about Vic’s statement and does not initiate any investigations until he hears another reported case where the victim is the pastor’s wife and the suspect; Pete has the same description given by Vic. The offer remains in a dilemma, not knowing whether to go back and get an official statement from Vic or to ignore the case. The rights-based ethics framework is fundamental in understanding how the parties involved in the case were supposed to react to the prevailing situation, while procedural justice can give insight on the right cause of action that could have been adopted.
From a rights-based ethics standpoint, what is morally acceptable is that which is in accordance with the rights of everyone. By virtue of being human, individuals should enjoy natural and conventional rights, both positive and negative (White, 2019). Vic has the right to report and get justice if she is raped regardless of whether she is a prostitute or not and also despite the neighborhood where she resides. From a rights-based ethics perspective, the police officer has a moral duty to record the official statement and begin investigations without giving his opinion on the matter. Human beings have a right to be protected against forms of sexual violations such as rape. Therefore, the police officer is morally obligated to offer Vic justice if she is raped without using his moral compass to make a biased decision.
According to the concept of procedural justice, it is instrumental to exercising fairness when resolving a dispute or allocating resources. The concept is founded upon four pillars: trust, respect, neutrality, and voice (Quattlebaum et al., 2018). By upholding neutrality and trust, the police officer ought to have taken the official statement from Vic the first time without showing any form of doubt. The police officer had the moral duty to show respect to the victim by hearing her out even if her story was not convincing to him. Additionally, Vic’s case was supposed to be taken seriously because, according to the procedural concept, people need to be granted the chance to share their side of the story. Lastly, the office needed to have trust in the victim when offering his service.
The main value in consideration in the case is justice. In the criminal justice sphere, justice is one of the most fundamental moral values that the enforcement personnel should uphold (Choondassery, 2017). The case presents a conceptual issue of the definition of rape. The police officer believes that because the suspect is an acquaintance of the victim and being there is no sign for forced entry, the case should not be considered rape. Stigmatization for the sex workers can be considered the social constraint in the case, which is baring the victim from getting justice. From a rights-based ethical point of view, the police should make decisions based on the rights of the people. However, because there is the stereotype that sex workers may accuse their apprentice when they are not paid, the officer fails to follow the correct legal procedure because he thinks the victim is a sex worker from her clothing and neighborhood.
Having acknowledged his mistake and consequently being faced with a dilemma, it is ethically and morally right from a rights-based framework for the police officer to go back and take Vic’s official statement. Applying the concept of procedural justice upon his return, he should exhibit all the principles of the concept of justice (Quattlebaum et al., 2018). For instance, it will be necessary to trust the victim and allow a voice to express her feelings and statements. The officer should be remorseful and apologetic to Vic during his second visit and should also be ready to face any legal implications for failing to collect the official statement the first time. According to the framework, it will be wrong not to go back because the victim’s rights will not have been upheld.
The main strength of opting to go to the victim is that the victim’s rights will be eventually exercised. Again, the action is practical and can be important in helping the officer right his wrongs. The main weakness of the action based on the ethical framework is that it is only inclined towards what is right and what is wrong. The framework does not try to explain the actual reason why some acts are considered immoral (Broberg & Sano,2017). In conclusion, the rights-based framework and the concept of procedural justice are instrumental in understanding the case and solving the ethical dilemma that is presented at the end of the case study. They provide a justified cause of action that can aid in creating morality in society.
References
Broberg, M., & Sano, H. (2017). Strengths and weaknesses in a human rights-based approach to international development – an analysis of a rights-based approach to development assistance based on practical experiences. The International Journal of Human Rights, 22(5), 664-680.
Choondassery, Y. (2017). Rights-based approach: The hub of sustainable development. Discourse and Communication for Sustainable Education, 8(2), 17-23.
Quattlebaum, M., Meares, T. L., & Tyler, T. (2018). Principles of procedurally just policing.SSRN Electronic Journal.
White, A. (2019). Toward a systematic, rights-based moral theory.Open Philosophy, 2(1), 491-502.