How Civil Justice Reacts To Bitcoin Custody

Please fol­low and like us:
Pin Share

Con­flict is part of human nature. Civ­i­liza­tions are defined by how they resolve dis­putes. Hamurabi’s code was noto­ri­ous for its mer­ci­less appli­ca­tion of “an eye for an eye.” Auto­crats from King Solomon to James I met­ed out rough jus­tice in roy­al courts, often arbi­trar­i­ly, and with no oppor­tu­ni­ty for fur­ther review. And with­out even these harsh sys­tems, indi­vid­u­als were left to fend for them­selves, resort­ing to vio­lence to resolve inter­per­son­al conflict.

The rise of the civ­il jus­tice sys­tem marked a wel­comed turn toward fair­ness and peace­ful ratio­nal­i­ty in dis­pute res­o­lu­tion. To be sure, this sys­tem is still backed by the sovereign’s monop­oly on vio­lence, but it pro­vides for an ami­ca­ble adju­di­ca­tion of claims based on evi­dence and argu­ment giv­en by all lit­i­gants, as well as judg­ments that are review­able for error. Wrongs are reme­died not through vengeance, but com­pen­sa­tion. The civ­il jus­tice sys­tem seeks to make the injured par­ty whole. And it does this by shift­ing val­ue from the liable par­ty to the injured par­ty through mon­ey judgments. 



Source link

Please fol­low and like us:
Pin Share

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *