Images Of Justice: Open-Eyed Or Blindfolded?

Historically, the image of Justitia did not have her eyes covered. The shift in the symbolism revolving around the image of justice has been documented by Martin Jay, who traces the changes in the images of justice in the West from the fifteenth century onwards. In one of the earliest Roman incarnations, goddess Justitia was depicted as a clear-sighted woman, considering the merits of the cases before her. However, at the end of the fifteenth century, there began a shift in the portrayal of the gaze of justice, with a blindfold over her eyes. One of the earliest illustrations of this change was in the form of a fool covering the eyes of justice, which was meant as a satire to signify the occluded vision of justice robbing her of “her ability to get things straight, wield her sword effectively, or see what is balanced on her scales”. He places justice with other allegories of occluded vision like Death, Ambition, Cupidity, Ignorance, and Anger to say that the blindfolded vision of justice was not linked to positive but negative meanings. Even in classical and biblical texts, blindness was conceptualised as a disability or punishment. While the sighted were informed, the blind exemplified limitations, ignorance and impaired judgment. Such meanings have been repeatedly depicted through medieval imagery, like that of Synagoga and Ecclesia. Unlike Ecclesia (representing the New Testament or Christianity), Synagoga (who signified the Old Testament or at times Jews in general), is shown blindfolded, wilfully obstinate, refusing (rather than unable) to comprehend the 'light of redemption'. Thus, she is embodying the harms of the blindfold.

However, the satirical meanings behind images of blindfolded justice started changing into “a positive emblem of impartiality and equality before the law”. A blindfolded justice could escape the “seduction of images” and keep the distance necessary to act impartially. Once depicted negatively, the Hebrew interdiction of images manifested in Synagoga's failure to see the light of Christianity was turned into law's even-handedness. It was also believed that justice's blindfold placed a restraint that allowed Justitia to walk cautiously into the future instead of rushing impulsively to judgment. Nonetheless, when the female gaze of justice was covered, it ended the possibility of a case to be seen for its particular detail and specific context. Thus, each case became comparable to other like cases, subsumable under a general principle, enabling her to render “algorithmic justice”.

Looking at the statue of justice throughout history tells us that both open-eyed- and blindfolded versions have existed. Not only has justice been portrayed without a blindfold in history, but its representation has also depicted the changing values and ideals linked to the notion of justice. Even in contemporary times, the images of justice are not necessarily blindfolded. Taking the case of India, Justitia has been represented differently across the different court buildings. The statue of justice in the Bombay High Court is not blindfolded and holds scales in one hand and a sword in the other. In the Calcutta High Court, the image of justice has been carved as part of the architecture, with some images blindfolded and others depicting justice as open-eyed. Turning to the apex court, the new statue is not the only one without a sword and blindfold. A mural in the court complex, unavailable to the public, depicts the Goddess of Justice and two other images of Mahatma Gandhi and Dharma Chakra. The image of justice in the mural is open-eyed, holding a book in one hand and the scales of justice in the other, which has been interpreted by former judge M. Jagannadha Rao as a Vedic deity of justice and argues that “does not close its eyes but allows the graceful rays flowing from its eyes to illuminate the administration of justice”.

Moving beyond the image of justice in the form of a lady with either open eyes or blindfold, there have been alternate conceptions of the representation of justice. For instance, the SouthAfrican Constitutional Court rejected the symbol of justitia in favour of the African tree, which signifies the traditional African notion of "Justice under a tree". Interestingly, the Madras High Court has a symbol of justice that looks nothing like the lady justice.

shows that while there is no statue of Lady Justice in the Madras High Court, the presence of a lighthouse in the court complex, which stands as a symbol of justice, acts as its very own statue of justice.

The diverse ways in which the image of justice has been represented make it evident that there is no universally accepted or standardised image of justice. The blindfold symbolises that justice should be delivered impartially, without bias or influence to keep up the ideal of equal treatment under the law. Conversely, the open-eyed portrayal emphasises awareness, transparency, and the need for justice to be sensitive to the intricacies of human experience. Ultimately, the balance between these two representations is essential to create a just society. While the imagery of justice is essential to the conception of justice in society, the focus must not only be in replacing the images of justice but a real and substantial change in the notion of justice itself. Justice, open-eyed, with scales in one hand and the constitution in the other, should be a depiction of the reality and not only of aspirations.

The author is a Ph.D. Scholar at Centre for the Study of Law and Governance, JNU. Views are personal.