Nils Christie has spoken on the issue of legal conflicts being taken as property; this is the way in which individuals in society are affected negatively while the legal system is open to see the conflict as a property and not a personal matter. Nils Christie’s view as “conflicts as property” will be discussed throughout this summary whether or not it is essential or detrimental to the current state of law and to society as well. The theory of conflicts being seen as property is a very well thought out notion as well as the ideology of restorative justice. Christie speaks about the loss of the victims right to personal justice while the state uses conflict for personal gain and satisfaction. This analysis will be used to boost Nils Christie’s view on conflict as property.
Nils Christie says “We have to organize social systems so that conflicts are both nurtured and made visible, and also see to it that professionals do not monopolize the handling of them” (Christie, Conflict as Property, pg.1)1 which portrays great emphasis on his intense dislike for government officials and lawyers alike for taking control of conflicts while the victim loses control of their right to their conflict. People have the right to deal with their own conflicts since they are taken away from them and reduced to property and allowing thus to occur is socially crippling through his statement “Conflict might kill, but too little of it might paralyze” (Christie, Conflicts as Property, pg.1).2 The emphasis on the advancement of society being dependant on conflict regarding the notion that modern law is a result of society accepting the laws that have been implemented and cannot be changed or challenged. A prime example of this is the reflection of a Tanzanian couple who were to be divorced. the couple are said to have lived together in an overcrowded house where the majority of villagers had lived there as well. The man in the relationship was said to have invested a...