Lockean Justice and the Law of Restitution: Reassessing Property Rights and Egalitarian Redistribution

Abstract

Debates on property rights within Lockean political philosophy have often been shaped by right-libertarian interpretations that emphasise strong individual entitlements and minimal redistribution. This article challenges such interpretations by arguing that a principled application of Lockean justice in property in fact supports extensive redistributive outcomes. The analysis begins by clarifying the core elements of the Lockean thesis of justice in property, including the moral conditions under which original acquisition and subsequent transfer of holdings are considered legitimate. Building on this foundation, the article develops a Lockean conception of the law of restitution as a normative response to holdings acquired in violation of Lockean principles. It argues that restitution provides a coherent mechanism for addressing historical injustices in property acquisition and transfer, particularly where present holdings cannot be traced to just origins. Within this framework, property lacking identifiable rightful owners ought not to remain concentrated in the hands of current possessors, but should instead be subject to egalitarian redistribution. The article further contends that the pervasive history of Lockean injustice—including feudal landholding systems, colonial expropriation, and coercive transfers—undermines the legitimacy of a substantial portion of existing global property distributions. When assessed through a Lockean restitutionary lens, these historical wrongs generate strong moral reasons for widespread redistribution aimed at restoring justice rather than merely preserving current entitlements. By situating restitution at the centre of Lockean property theory, the article demonstrates that Lockean justice is not inherently opposed to egalitarian outcomes. Instead, it may require significant redistribution as a matter of corrective justice, thereby offering a philosophically grounded challenge to dominant libertarian accounts of property and entitlement.