Generally speaking, this school of thought is
the opposite of natural law. Legal positivism proposes that there isn't necessarily a
connection between law and morality. Instead, it holds that law comes from
various sources, usually the government. If the government enacts a law, then
it should be followed. Some Schools of thought have expressed
divergent ideas of law.
In
this article, we shall continue our examination of Ideas of law as conceived by
other schools of thought and you should be able to relate any idea of law to its
origin and school of thought, Identify areas of similarities and of differences
and relate your knowledge of the different Ideas of Law to law in your
environment in pre modern and modern times.
Also read: What is law? and its Characteristics
The idea of law to its
origin and school of thought
1. Positivist School of Thought
Positivist idea of law and
legal system is that it is a closed logical system. It does not admit of
anything metaphysics – anything that is not law. Its test of law is enforcement
and command. It is immaterial that the law, as it is, is unjust, immoral,
ethical or unethical, obeyed or violated. Emphasis is on formalism, not the
contents of the law. John
Austin states that every
rule of law is backed by sanction, and that sovereign is not a creation of law
but is Supreme protest as, above the law and enjoying habitual obedience from
the bulk of the population. He maintained that every law is a command or
rather, laws and rules are species of command – be it in form of order,
command, request, prayer or other. A purported command is no command unless it
is accompanied with force or threat of force.
Jeremy Bentham believes
that sovereignty is under the law and law is to be based on utilitarian
philosophy of pleasure and avoidance of pain. Professor H. L. A. Hart states
that Law is nothing but a set of rules and its function is law itself, not
moral. For a legal system, he identified a union of Primary and Secondary
rules. The primary rules are rules of obligation, - substantive law e.g. law
governing theft, marriages, succession etc. Secondary rules, on the other hand,
are ancillary or procedural.
Both have external and
internal aspects. External aspects refers to the way the ordinary man sees law
(normative aspect), while internal aspects is the belief in the efficacy of the
law before it is enforced by officials and courts, who are part of the law and
also operate it. This seems to be an introverted view of law and a marked
departure from positivist idea of law. According to Hans Kelsen, Law is a norm,
not a rule. A norm is an ‘ought’ proposition existing in an inverse pyramid,
such that one norm derives its validity from a higher norm – parent norm – and
ultimately from the first fundamental norm, the grand-norm, which turns out to
be non-legal (metaphysics).
He concluded that Law is a
closed legal system.
The positivist idea of law
has been criticized for several reasons. Even the positivists themselves are in
disarray and are not consensual on what law is. Law is far older than concepts
of enforcement or sanction. It is not clear whether the positivist mean that
sanction must accompany law or qualify it.
We must recognize that it
is not every rule or law that has sanction attached to it. For example Wills
Act 1837 is a law but it contains no penal sanction.
In Nigeria, concepts of
‘command’ and ‘sovereign’ may be strange. Sovereignty belongs to the people
from whom government through the Constitution derives all its powers and authority.
(See The Constitution 1999, S. 14(2)(a))
Positivist notion of Law
also has no place for traditional or customary law, nor does it recognize
International Law as law.
Yet, history has no record
of “lawless” pre-legal state in any part of Africa. Law is a gapless system of
rules governing all human interaction.
Prof. Hart belongs to the
Positivist school. He has expressly denied that customary law is law and his reasons
are that:
(i) Coincidence of habit of
a community does not make a habit law.
(ii) The people in the
community were only “being obliged” and incurred no legal sanction for
disobedience.
(iii) The people were not
obligated or ‘under obligation’, under pain of punishment for default.
(iv) In underdeveloped
communities, primary rules exist, specifying duties and obligation and
proscribing particular conduct but there are no secondary rules stipulating how
and by whom primary rules are to be formulated, modified or extinguished.
Other positivists (one of
them Prof. Fuller) admit that customary law is law; not just being a model of
rules but an instrument of human interactions.
2. Natural Law School
Natural law is law of
nature which dictates natural ordering of things, or a law higher than positive
law purporting to invalidate positive law. It is law common to all mankind. It
is derived from God and from reason professing the principle of natural
justice, and universal acceptance.
It consists of absolute
principles, immutable, transcending time, space and dynamics of social change.
On the basis of philosophical ethical idea based on nature and reason, the
naturalist considers law as what is just, good and equitable. It offers a standard
to which man-made law (positive law) should conform.
Cicero in Du Re Publica
stated that natural law could not be altered or abrogated, not even by the
senate or by the people. The focus of natural law was to meet man’s divine
character and his secular social needs.
Its major concern were
(i) The universal and
permanent underlying basis of law
(ii) The relationship of
Law and justice and
(iii) The problem of social
stability
According to Plato,
everything that exists is a creation of the mind, and nothing exists outside
the mind. Law is a state of concrete things – an imperfect reproduction of the
idea.
Aristotle added that law
belongs to reason and man is by nature endowed with reason. In adapting to new
needs natural law turned out to be a blend of Roman edicts of practor peregrinus,
jus gentium or equity. The teachings of Christian fathers (Ambrose
Augustine, St. Thomas Aquinas) as well as the sociological principle of right
of self-preservation derive from natural law. It is also called Divine Law, the
Law of Reason, the Unwritten Law, the Universal Law, the Eternal Law (lex
aecterna) or Moral Law).
3. Natural Law,
Legislation, Social Contract Etc.
The National Assembly enjoys
the power to pass anything into law or do anything except to “make a man a
woman and a woman man”. In the process of their legislation, lawmakers may be
guided by appeals to higher order, Justice and Truth. However, the search of
mankind for absolute justice is an endless one. For one thing; once a
legislature has enacted a law, it is neither competent for anyone nor even the
law court to challenge the Act, not being a delegated legislation or a by-law
on the ground that it is unjust or contrary to natural justice.
Furthermore, Locke and
Grotius, in their social contract theories, have rejected natural law, but
recognized certain human rights that are inherent or inalienable and not given
by man qua man.
Natural law also derive
from social solidarity, and Hart’s minimum contents of law, as well as Faller’s
morality are manifestations of Natural law as can be found in the 1999
Constitution. Examples are Rights to own property, Right to free speech, and
other human right provisions.
In modern times also concepts
of natural law are assuming new dimensions and are manifesting in such contents
as due process of law, Quasi-contracts, concept of reasonableness and of
natural justices, Rules of Administrative Tribunals and conflict of law.
Incidentally, attacks against
as well as defenses for Roman Catholicism and Lutheranism and of the overthrow
of the church as were Apartheid law and the Colour Bar in America were founded also on natural
law.
4. Realist School of Thought
The pragmatic doctrine of
the Realist school of thought was that the value of any assertion was to be
estimated in accordance with its practical bearing upon human interests on
enforcement process, system of Courts and social aids.
The Realists idea of law
therefore is that law is a means of meeting desirable social ends.
The test of law then is: capability
to serve desirable ends. The court was regarded as the touch stone of law. Law
is the Law of the law Court, implying that the judge has a creative role.
In essence, judicial
precedent is law. Its life is by experience not logic and is not to be treated
“as if it contains only axioms and corollaries of a book of mathematics”.
The realist concept of law
is suggestive that States or Communities without courts of law are lawless.
But we know of no record of breakdown of law and order in the early chief less societies in any part of Africa where there were neither determinate superior nor law courts. Even in many communities today in Nigeria, there are no law Courts and yet are peaceful and orderly as urban centres with wide range of Courts.
The Realist notion of law
is suggestive also that the following are law:
(i) The Judges rules
(ii) Contracts and
contractual obligations which Courts take cognizance of
(iii) Customary law
(iv) International law
(v) Religious or moral law,
which one can predict, or which the courts will recognize even if it has not.
One of the pitfalls of the
realist idea of law is that it arrogated to judges the power to make law on a
legal process.
Generally, the duty and
function of judges is to interpret the law so as to accord with accepted
theories of social justice and social values. Judicial law making, if at all,
is an exception rather than the rule.
At any event, it should be
remembered that one is a judge only by reference to law.
The Realist’s approach has
extended law to the field of psychology or psycho-analysis placing both
litigations and legal practitioners in the centre of the legal stage (Lloyds).
This flows out of the necessity of predicting judicial behaviour and analyzing
the minds of those upon whom the law may operate.
It adds little to ones
knowledge of law. After all, predictions may be right or wrong. Judges may be
strongly ‘weighed’ by a number of factors e.g. a ‘troubled mind’, state of
digestion, or social prejudices. All these make the boundaries of law more
complex and its definition farther elusive; such that “Law never is, but always
about to be.”
Also read: Roles and Responsibilities of Policy Stakeholders
Conclusion on Idea of law: Schools of Thought
In this article, you
studied the idea of law as conceived in different schools of thought. We
considered the notion of law from the perspectives of the classicists,
positivists, naturalists and realist’s schools of thought.
We differentiated one
thought from another. You have to think of associating with one school or
several but with justification.
We have examined the idea of law in England (Positivist notion) and in America (Realist notion). The former sees law as a command. To the latter, it is a judicial prediction. Neither considered the idea of law in Africa.
0 Comments