Legal Trouble in early 20th Century Europe
Kafka’s The Trial and the Problem of Justice
by Penbe Alize Özçalışkan
In The Trial written in 1914 by Franz Kafka, we see elements of an immensely flawed system of justice. The core of justice is the ability and right for one to represent and defend themselves, which clearly lacks in Josef K.’s situation. While Kafka is describing K.’s situation, he also describes the conditions of that society under the effect of the dysfunctional modernization that took place in the beginning of the twentieth century. Throughout the novel we see the fear of injustice and persecution in the absence of justice. Kafka also manages to demonstrate the crucial risks of what could occur when the legal systems do not carry out proper procedures regarding justice.
The main problem is that as an individual, or as a citizen, K. has no rights that he should have, such as the right to defend and represent himself, or even to know what he is being accused of. Throughout the trial he is merely a subject to the power of the court, which arbitrarily determines what law is. Where there is no solid foundation determining the law considering every individual equally, there can be no mention of justice. In systems of justice individuals should be made aware of their rights and should have the right for representation, both politically and legally, which clearly lacks in the society that is depicted in the novel. During his trial the pleas in law are not disclosed and no plaintiff appears, which completely destroys his right to know what he is accused of and his right to be legally represented.
The only legal advice K. is able to get is from an old attorney Huld, whose statements are just as vague as the ongoings of the trial. He is also the one who points out that the defence is not actually permitted, but only “tolerated”, meaning that defence does not have any consequence according to the court. The reason why it is said that it is “tolerated” could be to seem like they are acting according to an allegedly just and democratic system in the world of Kafka’s Trial, when clearly they are not, which makes the reader think about the relation between democracy and justice. He also states there is no chance of an acquittal, even if it was possible. With that the court is not a place where justice is served but becomes a place where there is no escape.
Despite all this ambiguity K. emerges from the passive state of being imprisoned and seeks to fathom the essence of the court. Since the trial (process) is not a step forward; rather, the procedure remains in limbo forever, does not proceed linearly but cyclically, and in that sense the trial is unproductive, it is worked on continuously but without result. As stated above, I believe what Kafka criticizes is a society claiming that they are acting upon just reasons, acting for the greater good, when in fact they only care about having power over the individuals they exploit, such as Josef K.