The big idea: Justice is the idea of fairness — but fairness comes in several kinds. There is fair sharing, fair punishment, fair repair and fair process. People demanding 'justice' may mean very different things.
Because justice has several meanings, it is deeply contested. To use it well in an essay, you need to know the four main types and be able to say which kind of justice a case is about.
- Distributive justice — are wealth and resources shared fairly?
- Retributive justice — does punishment fit the crime?
- Restorative justice — can harm be repaired and relationships rebuilt?
- Procedural justice — was the process fair (fair rules, fair trial)?
Which justice is being demanded?: The exam skill is to spot which justice a case involves. A war-crimes trial is about retributive justice; global poverty is about distributive justice; a truth commission is about restorative justice; a fair trial is about procedural justice. Naming the type sharpens your whole answer.
Free preview
This is the free notes preview
You're reading the free notes. Aimnova Pro unlocks the full study experience — and you can try it free for 7 days:
- FlashcardsLock in vocabulary and key terms with spaced repetition.
- Practice questionsAnswer exam-style questions and get instant AI marking.
- Mock exams & past-paper vaultSit full mocks and see exactly how examiners award marks.
- Personalised study planA daily plan built around your exam date and weak areas.
The clearest case of justice in global politics is the attempt to punish the worst crimes across borders: the International Criminal Court.
Case study — the International Criminal Court (ICC): The ICC tries individuals for genocide, war crimes and crimes against humanity when their own states will not. It is retributive justice on a global scale — the idea that even presidents and generals can be held to account. But it is contested: critics note most of its cases have targeted African leaders, while powerful states (whose citizens it cannot easily reach) escape — so its justice looks selective.
So the ICC shows both the promise of global justice (no one is above the law) and its problem (justice applied unevenly is itself a kind of injustice). Whether it delivers 'justice' is genuinely contested.
The key point: Justice comes in kinds — distributive, retributive, restorative, procedural — and each is contested. The ICC shows global retributive justice at work, powerful in principle but selective in practice, so even 'justice' institutions are argued over.
Practice with real exam questions
Answer exam-style questions and get AI feedback that shows you exactly what examiners want to see in a full-marks response.
Can there be global justice at all, or is justice always shaped by power? Weigh the debate.
The case FOR global justice
Institutions like the ICC and a shared body of universal rights mean even the powerful can, in principle, be held to account — a real advance on a world where might alone ruled.
The case that justice follows power
In practice, powerful states escape accountability and shape the rules of trade, aid and war-crimes prosecution, so 'justice' can reflect who holds power rather than pure fairness.
Two perspectives — weigh them: One view: global justice is real and growing (the ICC, universal rights). Another view: justice still follows power — the strong escape and shape the rules. Strong essays evaluate both, often concluding that global justice exists but is applied unevenly.
How justice comes up in Paper 2: A Paper 2 essay might ask whether real justice is possible in a world shaped by power. Name the type of justice, use a case like the ICC, then reach a judgement.
The 15-mark markband (what moves you up)
Bands 1–6
Mostly descriptive; perspectives not identified.
avoid
Bands 7–9
Clear knowledge, but perspectives identified, not explored.
7–9
Bands 10–12
Well-supported argument; perspectives explored.
10–12
Bands 13–15
Balanced, compelling; perspectives explored AND evaluated.
13–15
To what extent can there be global justice in a world shaped by power?
Model answer plan
See the mark-by-mark plan — for / against / judgement, with marking guidance — in study mode.
Common mistakes: 1. Treating justice as one thing. Name the type (distributive/retributive/restorative/procedural).
2. No real case. Use the ICC.
3. Ignoring the selectivity critique. It is the key counter-view.
4. Listing, not evaluating. Top marks need perspectives explored AND evaluated.
5. No judgement. Conclude on how far global justice is possible.