I take the Gieter´s statement as a constructive koan to meditate on. The first meditation is the following:
The German legal scholar Gustav Radbruch (1878-1949) distinguishes five categories in the legal field:
+ positive right
+ public interest
+ legal certainty
+ natural law
Justice and natural law belong together: Justice is equality before the law, whereby equality is predetermined by nature (or reason, which in this case seems to equate for Radbruch). The principles of this natural justice constitute natural law.
The positive right must also serve justice according to its claim. According to Radbruch, however, it can deviate from justice to a certain degree without having to be questioned by the judge. In such cases, he must balance the legal certainty guaranteed by positive law on the one hand with the ideals of justice and the common good on the other.
At a certain degree, however, positive law must be discarded in favour of natural justice, namely if it obviously contradicts the principles of justice (= equality before the law). This is the case wherever human rights are deliberately negated, e.g. when they serve the murder of political opponents, when they harm the common good, or when cruel punishments are threatened that are disproportionate to the offence.