Justice as a
commodity. A Monopoly market in Peru
Introduction
Corruption in the Peruvian judicial system is a known
fact that today is characterized by greater breadth and depth of the
questionable court decisions and pernicious as short and long term effects on
Peruvian society. Society has demanded judicial reforms but no government has
been willing, having arguments or moral capacity to realize this reform because
part de la political strategy is to keep the Status Quo of corruption to avoid
further penalties for illegal acts committed during the exercise period power.
Although some judges have been dismissed, have fled or are in prison, but a lot
is continuing its havoc protected by the protection afforded them the
"solidarity of their peers"; the few sanctioned lost that support or
not shared the benefits of immorality.
Some people, in a claim for higher budget for the
judiciary, say with naivety or irony that "power managers don’t know the
historical significance of the judicial function" (Monroy, 2003). There is
significance, but for growing and continuous negative impact of judicial
decisions, but not for the right attitude to administer true justice. In any
case, if it is correct that there is legal irrelevance of the judiciary.
The problem is not the lack of budget as another view
taken by many to behave the idea is that "in the last four years the
income of that institution (the judiciary) grew more than 100%, has increased
the number of 40% judges, judicial offices have been computerized, but
paradoxically productivity has fallen by 20% (Althaus, 2010). That is to more
resources less results, so the excuse of budget is unsustainable.
Moreover, Monroy (2012, p. A7) speaks of the misery of
law in Peru referring to the ease with which you buy or get the titles of
lawyers at universities that multiply in Peru, formed "mediocre lawyers
and without ethical base. " Naturally these lawyers without no real skills
aspire to occupy a place or position in public courts where the legal skills
are absent while greed and moral insanity are basic requirements. Private
business and requirements are outside their aspirations if you think about the
need to have real professional skills.
Corruption, mercantilist mentality, predatory vocation
are aspects that characterize that behave as sellers of a vital service to
society, the justice. It is vital for a society that wants to be developed but
the judicial debasement society condemns this moral backwardness and misery.
Justice as a commodity
and Monopoly
Situations where mercantilist vocation beat, abuse,
corruption fill several phonebooks equivalent volumes, so there is abundant
empirical evidence to support the above stated. What we are trying now is to
analyze from the economic point of view of a market with certain
characteristics.
To discuss market must have a commodity, good or
service sold to whoever is willing to pay to acquire it (goods) or be benefited
by their use and effects (services).
In a market of goods or services, there are two agents
that interact to determine the price and quantity equilibrium; that is, the
quantity and the price at which both have needs and interests coincide. Figure
1 corresponds to point E, with P * and Q * as equilibrium quantities. Breakeven
out excess demand or supply we exceed occurs in the first consumers should
begin the process of setting offering more pay, in the second the offerert or producer must gradually lower the price to
attract more consumers or buyers. In theory, the setting is spontaneous and
depends on the decision of buyers and sellers. The balance is better for
everyone.
In a monopoly there is a demand curve but no offer so
it is no possible to get this phenomenon of spontaneous adjustment. However, an
amount sold at a price that will be offered to consumers. In this case, the
point is decided by monopolist producer.
The goal of the monopolist is profit maximization, the
difference between revenues and costs, i.e.:
B = TR - TC = P * Q - CT
B = profit P = price per unit, Q = amount, CT = Total
cost
The decision rule in the case of monopoly is equality
of marginal cost and marginal revenue but the price is set at the level
corresponding to average income, unlike the competitive market where marginal revenue
and marginal cost equals and the price is corresponding to that equality. Chart
2 shows that although the balance amount Q * where marginal revenue equals
marginal cost (MR = MC) is determined is higher than the price corresponding to
that equality.
In real life, production costs increase as production
volume expands, so total curves and marginal cost are increased in the relevant
portion; but there are cases where the total costs are proportional to the
volume and marginal costs are constant, which are represented by a horizontal
line. Market demand is the conventional way with a negative slope and marginal
revenue also with a slope that is twice the median income or for the demand.
Figure 3 shows this particular situation.
Focusing attention on the de justice system, and the
confirmation that justice is a commodity and judiciary (judicial or equivalent)
is the monopoly that offered in the market, we see that in practice, it
exercises the power performing third-degree discrimination having two markets,
which can be set different prices for different elasticity of demand curves.
The first market (right side of Figure 4) has the
elastic demand is the demand for legal services by honest person. The price to
pay is that of transparent legal and court costs, so the judicial system (the
judicial monopoly) provides a low amount. That is, the judgments for the
plaintiff that are legal and transparent and
favor that is right, but they are limited in number. The monopolist
earns little in this market therefore the amount offered is less.
In the market 2, the elasticity of demand is low
because the buyer or claimant (dishonest) is disposed of more legal services
(ruling favorable to their interests, but this violating the laws) In this
case, the possibility of gain is high and the seller or producer (judge) has
the propensity to offer more services. In other words, it is easier to find a
judge hearing and sentencing for a dishonest person instead of an honest
person.
The consumer called "dishonest person"
includes a wide range of characters: Common criminals, murderers, kidnappers,
thugs, drug dealers, smugglers, senior government officials and even former
presidents, accused of corruption, and also other judges who lost their
"divine protection". This group in countries like Peru is continually
expanding so the chance of winning by third type discrimination is greater for
bidders (judicial system).
In the monopoly market for good, markets can be
physically separated; in the case of business justice, the applicants in both
markets (honest and dishonest people) can occur at the same physical space
where the bidder (judge) acts.
A person who wants to recover land or housing owned
usurped by an offender is willing to pay the fees and expenses, but not covert
payments because "has the right and the law in its favor" hard
evidence can prove that the land or housing are his, and trust in justice. The
offender, the usurper known to have the law against them, but by having illegal
income of many previous fraudulent actions, has to "judge in his favor or
next"; furthermore it is known that the decision or court ruling will be
favorable; no trust is certain.
And laid off more. In the same space, two applicants
with different demand curves; the honest citizen has in his favor the law but
is the loser, dishonest is has in his favor to the judge and is the winner.
Mercantilism was imposed and third-degree discrimination is realized in the
sale of a service called "justice"
Referencies
De Althaus, Jaime (2010) Cambiar el poder
judicial
El Comercio, 26 de marzo del 2010, sección
A
Monroy Gálvez, Juan (2003) “¿Se busca prescindir
del Poder judicial?
El Comercio, 2003, sección A
Monroy Gálvez, Juan (2012) La miseria del
derecho en el Perú
El
Comercio, 9de enero de 2013, sección A, p. a7
Nicholson, Walter;
Snyder Christopher (2008) MICROECONOMIC THEORY. BASIC PRINCIPLES AND
EXTENSIONS
Thomson South Western, TENTH EDITION; USA
