The Rule of Law Essay

The text book definition of rule of law is simply stated as the restriction of the arbitrary exercise of power by subordinating it to well-defined and established laws. This in laymen’s terms simply means that power is no-longer the ultimate decider,

Jurisprudence explores what would be the simplest manifestation of law so as to create a civil society society where both individual liberty and normative goals are practiced. Should the the aim of law be primarily centered on the protection of individual liberty or, instead, the normative goals geared toward the benefit of of civil society? The laws in any society ought to not be centered on normative goals it ought to conjointly defend individual liberty.

The statement above said by Lord Bingham, from ‘The Rule of Law’ (2007) 66 (1) Cambridge Law Journal 67-85, p. 76. The statement references that the rule of law is not abided by if the state does not provide human protection. This statement can be looked upon, agreed and disagreed with after reviewing the two theories in the rule of law. This will be made possible, as I compare Joseph Raz’s formal theory and Lord Bingham’s Substantive Theory on the rule of law. But firstly, I will address what the Rule of Law is;

As individuals we have unique ideas about what liberty means to us. The key factor of liberty is the right to freedom and equality. This means being in control of the decisions we make about our lives and choice of lifestyle we choose without restraints from the law or other people (Fried, 2005). Within this essay it will discuss whether the rule of law protects our liberty. It will examine the poll tax in reference to the essay question and look at how the poll tax crushed the liberty of the United Kingdom. It will also look at the fascinating history of piracy and refer back to it to give us solid ideas of liberty and the rule of law in that era and how it differs to the 21st century. The essay will establish solid arguments for the rule of law and explain and discuss why it is fundamental we continue to practice the rule of law. But with that in sight this piece of work will also look at some of the issues held with the rule of law and consider how the rule of law may be ignored and manipulated in certain countries, causing chaos and crushing its nation’s liberty and freedom to legal rights.

The rule of law is seen as being one of the most fundamental components of the UK constitution as well as being a principle that is concerned with restricting parliamentary action. Though the rule of law is seen to be a component in the constitution; the actual meaning of the rule of law has been very problematic to interpret. This is considerably down to the fact that it means different things to different people as since the nineteenth century, academics, politicians and judges have proposed diverse definitions and explanations in regards to the rule of law and the role it upholds in the UK constitution.

Philosophers such as Ronald Dworkin and H.L.A. Hart have referred to discretion as “the hole in the doughnut” (doughnut theory of discretion) and “where the law runs out” (natural law theory). In perspective,

I agree mostly with what Ronald Dworkin is quoted as stating in this article. His opinion of the “moral conception of law’s normativity”(479) is what

to the law. The rule of law often is stated to be one of the

Looking into criminal justice procedure, many administrations are at work. Starting with the police, to the courts and concluding in corrections. Though all these sectors have different tasks, their combined focus is processing the law. Regardless what the process is called criminal justice will continue to serve with discretion, conviction, and correction. When first presented with the question whether criminal justice is a system, non-system, and network I leaned toward a network. Throughout our discussions, lectures, and readings I felt the process presented itself as a network. Intertwined divisions working for a common goal. Further into my research and help from Webster, I decided that the criminal justice

Traditionally, the positive image of a company or a brand is very important in the contemporary world. As a result, the question of morality of each individual working within an organization is of a paramount importance. In such a situation there should be no exceptions from the rule and executives could not be in a privileged position. This is the desirable ideal many companies strive to achieve at least in a public eye. However, the reality turns to be quite different from what is expected and the analyzed case of an executive’s double standard is just another evidence of the fact that the real life is so complicated that the common rules, including moral

The rule of law, in other words, is where the country functions within a structure of law to prevent anarchy . As what Sir John Donaldson said in the case of Heaton’s Transport v Transport and General Workers’ Union , the courts and the rule of law is there to protect the individuals from unfair and tyrannical treatments by others. However, he also stated that to have that ‘protection’, we ourselves must accept that the law be relevant to everyone and restricts the freedoms that we ought to have. There are two types of interpretation of the rule of law, which are the procedural mechanism and the political theory.

The proposition by Austin to reduce various types of law into a single form, as command of the Sovereign backed with sanctions had invited much criticism. One of the flaws in his proposition is that not every law is coercive in the way that it is backed with sanction. To view law as command backed by threats of sanction is to overlook a significant part of the legal system.

Kelsen distinguishes the legal norm and normal norm. Legal norm derives its validity from the external sources and the particular “ought” of the legal, as distinguish from the moral norm, is the sanction. Kelsen found the distinction between legal and other “oughts” in that the former backed by the force of the state, the preoccupation of law being with the prospect of disobedience rather than obedience. Thus, it is prescription of sanction that imparts significance of a norm, or putting it in another way, Law is the primary norm, which stipulates the sanction. Kelsen focused on the problem of determining legal validity, that is, on the issue of how legal rules and public acts are to be invested with normativity, their formal authority as binding law, enforceable through sanctioned state power. Simplifying, Kelsen viewed a system based on legislative sovereignty as logically incomplete, and indeed unstable, and sought to ground the legality of state action more formally in a supra- legislative body of rules, a Grundnorm. He argued that any given act could only be considered valid, or normative, if it is enabled by, and does not conflict with, a specific and formally superior legal rule. Furthermore, all legal rules, in order to confer validity on lower order rules, must be capable of being enforced by a judge or ‘jurisdiction’.

her idea that the rule of law exists “through the cognitive process of the human mind, the language of the rule of law has not only represented reality, but has also played a leading role in the creation and transformation of reality; accordingly, it has contributed to the modelling of the shared consciousness of society, including that of international society” (Beaulac, 2009, p.1). The notion of the rule of law and its history stems from many traditions and continents and is intertwined with the evolution of the history of law itself. Recent attempts to formalize its meaning have drawn on this rich history of diverse understandings. In a modern sense, the rule of law has developed into a government which is based upon non-arbitrary rules as opposed to one based on the power and whim of an absolute ruler. The concept of rule of law is deeply linked to the principle of justice, involving an ideal of accountability and fairness in the protection and vindication of rights and the prevention and punishment of wrongs.

The given right of any person to legal council is part of what sets the United states of America apart from the rest of the world, However not all have access to this given right because the current legal system is broken. Not actually broken, the law is good, and has been developed for over 200 years of experience and trial and error, however the system of delivering the law, and making the law accessible and affordable is broken. Today in order to operate Law firms must try to juggle huge caseloads and charge large fees because the system that is being used is one that has not changed since the profession of law came about. How do lawyers expect to help change the world and make it a better place when it ignores what the world is