Was Michel Misick just or unjust?
Could we say that that the former Premier of the Turks and Caicos Islands is just or unjust? Misick argument is based on the fact that he is seeking political asylum because he is unfairly accused by the British Government because he wants to lead the county into independence. Socrates would say that he is unjust for several reasons: he was not just because he escaped his impending conviction and that he sought asylum rather than dealing with his accusers. Socrates would say that the honourable thing to do is turn yourself in because it is dishonourable to violate any law. Socrates argument was that he was not going to violate the law of Athens which condemned him to death because it would make him unjust. The key idea of this pedagogy is that the law is an overarching structure of society and it teaches us to be good. It is debatable how far anyone can separate the laws of a state from the people who apply them. Ironically one of his bail conditions is that he must remain in the Turks and Caicos Islands unless he seeks permission for the Supreme Court to leave. His case up to today’s date is still an ongoing pending trial.