Although evidence and proof may seem of concern to only a small group of people, it should in fact concern anyone who cares about justice and giving punishment to people who deserve it. ‘Innocent until proven guilty’ or the presumption of innocence is a legal principle that everyone who is accused of committing a crime should be considered innocent until there is proof for their guilt. This principle emphasizes the importance of evidence. Without it or with the wrong evidence, innocent people might be punished while the guilty criminals are living a normal life with us. As these types of injustices can happen, countries implemented this law. I believe that the same principle should be applied to public censure and there are several reasons to support my opinion.
Firstly, the people don’t deserve criticism. People simply throw words at others when they are accused of something, even though they don’t know if they are innocent. It is the same for public censure. When a person is accused of a crime, especially felonies such as murder or abuse, society condemns them and criticizes them. These words can cause mental problems such as depression or panic disorder. However, when it is proven that the person is innocent, the people who used to criticize and verbally abuse them suddenly change their attitudes or even hide, as if nothing happened. The ironic thing is that most of them don’t give a proper apology. In fact, innocent people will be left with trauma and mental disorders.
Another reason is that the innocent will have to get compensated for the damages they received. By public censure, innocent people will receive economical, psychological, and social damages. Firstly, they will receive social losses as they will be branded as ‘criminal’ and people will avoid them. This will lead to psychological and economical losses, too. Who will compensate for these damages? Nobody can, and will. In order to prevent these situations and losses from happening, the principle should be applied to public censure.
In conclusion, I have provided 2 reasons for my opinion: the innocent don’t deserve criticism and it will become a witch hunt, and nobody will compensate for the damages they receive. If the principle ‘innocent until proven guilty’ isn’t implemented in public censure, society might end up witch-hunting the innocent, and the world will become a place where innocent people are criticized for crimes they didn’t commit. Therefore, I believe that the presumption of innocence should be applied to public censure, too.
Comments