Daily life is awash with moral puzzles, making the task of sifting the good from the bad and the decidedly ugly a weighty and largely neglected chore. To give some relief to this apparent bottleneck of unexamined issues, each month dogma will dust off its ‘moral lens’ and scrutinise an ethical question with a view to providing it with an answer.  Naturally the answer may not

In some societies honesty carries greater value than in others. Yet, insofar as the rule of law is concerned, is not honesty a fundamental ingredient without which legal systems the world over would simply cease to function? If this is so, what should we think of an appeal court which decrees that married women who commit adultery may lie about their extra-marital actions in order to maintain their honour?

Honesty is undoubtedly one of the cornerstones of any bona fide legal system. A court in which both the accuser and the accused may lie with impunity would be little different from that of the legal apparatus which Alice falls upon during her adventures in Wonderland. Of course, if everyone were to tell the truth without a second thought the practice of jurisprudence would be a very different art. Thus, it is a given that some individuals will willfully seek to pervert the course of justice by lying and distorting the truth. The role of the court, therefore, is pivotal in deciding upon what is fact and what is fiction, ensuring public justice for all through the lens of truth.

To guarantee a fair and rigorous rule of law many countries resort to the use of appeal courts, within which cases may be re-examined so as to make certain that the first verdict was just. Although controversy is no stranger to the appeal court system, in the case of Italy ’s Court of Cassation the word controversy is scarcely sufficient. For, in March 2008 Italy’s highest appeal court ruled that married

To argue that, in certain circumstances, one may lie to protect one’s honour begs the question of which actions may be considered damaging to an individual ’s honour. Custodians of the law could fuel a library of weighty tomes with the legal implications of this remarkable ruling, but from a purely ethical standpoint we are faced with at least one hard question: Is honour more valuable than honesty?

The value of an individual’s honour amongst their friends and family is self-evident. Without honour a person may be abandoned by their peers, leaving them facing an uncertain future in which social succour may be hard to come by. Those who lack, or are perceived to lack honour must fight twice as hard for their voice to be heard. In short, to lose one ’s honour is no little matter. But is honour so valuable that it ranks higher than honesty,

If honesty does indeed play second fiddle to honour, we are left with the possibility of the honourable liar – surely an oxymoron if ever there was one? To lie, and yet claim integrity is hard to warrant, but what else is Italy ’s Court of Cassation saying? Its male dominated judges have publicly decreed, that a married woman ’s honour is more precious than her being seen to tell the truth where adultery is concerned. And where does this leave the honest woman, who has committed no act of adultery and claims as such. Will she be seen in an ambiguous light, since all concerned will be well aware that she is entitled to lie in regard to this act? Does her truth carry so little currency since honesty has less clout before the court? More, what of male adulterers? Should they not be accorded the same right as their female counterparts?

The queries raised by this decision are legion, and whether it will remain unchallenged in the coming months remains open to question. What should be said, however, is that justice and the law rest upon the principle of truth. Without honesty the system of trial by judge and jury loses its very raison d ’être, for how can a just verdict be delivered where deception is seen to be tolerated? Honour quite clearly has its place and value in society, but in as much as the law is concerned honesty must take priority. Within the law courts, to exchange honesty for honour is to turn the judiciary on its head, and to invite a form of justice into the law courts which has no place outside of a Lewis Carroll story.

Next month looks at...

The Politics of Conscience. According to some an individual's conscience is integral to their moral decision-making process.  Those bereft of conscience tend to be ruthless in their dealings with others, not to say downright dangerous. But what place does conscience