Law has been used in our society as an instrument to regulate the external human actions from the ancient period of time, without precise and universally accepted meaning of it. In general, law can be defined as a rule regulating the human actions. There are various rules operating in our society traditionally in the form of morality, religion and consciousness, and, at the same time, our activities are governed by the different formal rules as set and enforced by the state. Hence, our activities in one hand are regulated by the moral rules, norms and values followed by a community from the early age of human civilization and on the other hand by the formal rules enforced by the state. Similarly, the term law is used in physical or natural science, for example, the law of gravity, the law of reflection or law of friction or law of inertia, etc. but these rules or expressions cannot be defined as law.
Along with the development of time and knowledge, different jurists have been defined and characterized the law in different manner and various schools of law have been developed to answer the question what the law is. In spite of these great efforts, still there is no such a definition of law which can be applied in a perfect manner in all the cases and accepted universally. Problem is not in its necessity but in its definition because the definitions have been made for the different purposes and in the different context as required to deal with a particular problem of a particular society at a particular period of time
Difficulties arise because of the difference in the definitions of law not because of its necessity. The term law, in its most common and widest sense, is used to denote any rule of action, that is to say, any standard or pattern, a canon or norm to which actions are required to confirm, or by which the actions of things are to be regulated. And in strict sense, law is only a rule of human actions enacted or issued by state and enforced by punishment.
At present, there are two extreme positions of law. One emphasizes its coercive character and describes the law as the command of the highest sovereign authority, and holds that the law must be free from ethics, sociology, history and political philosophy; and it is enforced by the physical power of a state- punishment. By contrast, the other lays stress on the social acceptance of law. It, hence, emphasizes on the actual observance, the growth of customs, the living law of community and nation as the decisive elements. This thought admits that the law may receive authoritative confirmation from the sovereign but not created by him. However, the differences between these two approaches are relative rather than absolute. It is essentially the matter of emphasis.
In fact, social acceptance with certainty and effective enforcement with uniformity is the basic notion of law. The law has created a boundary line within which all of our activities are confirmed and the rights and obligations are defined. When the law takes its form through social acceptance and enforced by the state, it becomes binding for all and the human actions are to be conducted as per these confined rules. It is the fundamental concept of rule of law.
Meaning of Business Law
Now, we can refer some prominent definitions given by the jurists which may help us to understand the meaning of law with possible clarity.
Black Stone says: Law, in its most general and comprehensive sense signifies a rule of action and has applied indiscriminately to all kinds of action, whether animate, rational and irrational.
Similarly, Hooker defines law as "any kind of rule or canon whereby actions are framed ..."
Austin defines "law is a general command of the sovereign (individual or body) issued to those in subjectivity and enforced by the physical power of the state. According to him, law is a general command that a state or sovereign issues to the people by laying down a rule of action, of enforced by the judicial and administrative tribunals. He has propagated that law is a command which imposes a duty and the failure to fulfill the duty invites sanction. For him law has three main features:
i. Law is a command.
ii. It is issued and enforced by a Sovereign authority.
iii. It has a sanction behind it.
Austin's theory of command has much criticized by other jurists in different aspects. In spite of all criticisms, the fact remains constant that laws is a command issued from the sovereign power and do depend greatly upon the coercive factor or sanction. Experience and empirical evidence have shown us that laws without sanction are not effective. It is indeed the fear of punishment which deters a great majority of people from committing crimes. This is the true merit and contribution of the Austinian theory. But his exclusion of law from sociology, political philosophy history and other social phenomena never be tenable.
Holland defines, "Law is a general rule of external human action enforced by a sovereign political authority".
According to Gray, "The law of the state or any organized body of men is composed of the rules which the courts lay down for the determination of legal rights and duties".
Similarly, Salmond states, "Law is the body of principles recognized and applied by the state in the administration of justice."
The law differs from the past because the social phenomenon changes continuously. The law differs from country to country because of the variation in social factors, e.g., development of society, traditions and customs of society, its need and the consciousness of the people.
Thus, Savigny admits that the nature of any particular system of law is a reflection of the spirit of the people who evolved it. He defines, so, "all law is the manifestation of the common consciousness of people". He wrote "law grows with the growth, strengthens with the strength of the people, and finally dies away as the nation loses its nationality".
Ihering defines law as "the sum of conditions of social life as assured by the state through the means of external compulsion."
Roscoe Pound states "In order to achieve the purpose of the legal order there has to be recognition of certain interests, their limitations and a mechanism to secure of those interests within such limits, so that, for him, law is a means for balancing the competing interests.
At last but not the least, law requires a minimum degree of regularity and certainty as defined by Austin, Holland, Grey and Salmond for without this it would be impossible to assert that what was operating in a given territory amounted to a legal system. Similarly, the law also has certain minimum degree of social acceptance by the people to whom it is addressed. Therefore, it is rightly said that law without regularity and certainty becomes an impotent or ineffective, law without social acceptance becomes tyrannous and law without both become nothing.
Prof. Lon Fuller, thus, has marked eight (Sine qua non) essentials of a legal system; hence, law must possess the following characteristics:
i. The laws issued from such a source must be promulgated.
ii. It must be intelligible.
iii. It must be prospective in nature.
iv. It shouldn't be contradictory within the provisions.
v. It must generally be applicable equally to those in the same situations.
vi. It should avoid impossible demands.
vii. It should avoid frequent change.
viii. Official actions must be congruent with the promulgated rules.
Post a Comment
Post a Comment