If justice wins. Theoretical-legal reflections on Rawls and the current situation

In the recent historical period we are witnessing manifestations of war and violence that trigger serious reflection on sovereignty, justice and freedom, themes that have always been present in philosophical debate. The debate therefore focuses on how society can be organised in such a way that each citizen can pursue his or her own inclinations and enjoy his or her own freedom without this conflicting with the corresponding rights of his or her neighbour. Obviously, the reflection must also be extended to the relationship between states. According to Rawls, a just society should not pursue the greatest possible welfare for the greatest number of people, at the risk of neglecting minorities, but should be founded on a legal-political vision based on the values of security and universal justice. A similarity can be found with the Dworkin's theory of elaborating the integrity postulate, which ensures a judicial decision is always consistent with the principles chosen by a social community and realizes the postulate of equal concern and respect, the core of the connection between law and morality at the legislative and judicial levels. Rawls' thought also has many references to Kant's theory of justice. It shows how important the concept of freedom is, and that the very idea of freedom means having regulations that allow there to be no prevarication. A clear example of this is guaranteeism. In the protection of citizens, it is essential that there is a guarantee of protection from those who go against the laws. In this regard, after a brief examination of the major theories of punishment and the situation applied in Italy, we focus on the particular situation of rights management during the pandemic period. It is a source of reflection that is still relevant today because a balancing of principles had to be carried out, which should always be a guide.