Abstract
The debate that followed the first-in-human cardiac transplantation of a genetically modified pig organ emerged as a discussion of social justice when the patient's criminal record was revealed. This article aims to make sense of this debate by understanding the role of the 'public' today, particularly in relation to the governance of biotechnology. The relationship between the public and science is increasingly mediated through citizen participation. However, the public debate that unfolded on matters of social justice can be seen as an unmediated public discourse, which carries the risk of producing unpredictable outcomes. The content of the debate gains significance due to the functional differentiation of society. The medical subsystem does not consider the patient's history in terms of their involvement in the legal sphere, that is, their criminal record. Nevertheless, normative judgements are transferred across functional systems, allowing for the influence of public opinion and the potential for public scorn.