Jurisprudence, the knowledge of law and its interpretation, has long been a subject of debate and exploration. Within the field of jurisprudence, two schools of thought have emerged: natural law and positive law. These schools represent distinct perspectives on the relationship between law and morality. In this article, we will delve into the natural-positive law divide, discuss the philosophical and analytical schools of thought, and explore the need for natural law over positive law. By understanding the differences between these two approaches, we can gain insights into the importance of morality in shaping legal systems.

Law and Morality: An Inseparable Bond

The relationship between law and morality has been a subject of significant discussion throughout history. Both law and morality share the common goal of regulating righteous conduct in society. Morals often give rise to laws, and they are backed by social or external sanctions. However, it is important to note that not all immoral acts are illegal, and not all legal acts are necessarily moral.

To illustrate this point, we can examine the famous case of Queen v. Dudley and Stephens. In this case, a group of seamen and a young boy were stranded at sea and faced starvation. In order to survive, the seamen killed the boy and consumed his body. When they were rescued, they were tried for murder. This case raises ethical questions about whether the seamen's actions were justified in the face of imminent death. It challenges the notion that the law is always aligned with morality.

The Naturalist/Positivist Divide in Jurisprudence

The natural law and positive law perspectives represent two distinct approaches to jurisprudence. Natural law philosophers view law as a dictate of reason, believing that only rules that satisfy the test of reasonability should be enforced. They argue that certain rights are inherent and bestowed upon individuals by nature. Natural law is considered superior to human law, and it serves as a basis for deriving the moral validity of enforced laws.

On the other hand, positivists believe that law is simply a product of social conventions and human authority. They argue that the fact of obedience is sufficient to constitute something as law. For positivists, the moral validity of a law is not a necessary consideration for its legality.

To understand the difference between these schools of thought, let's consider the case of Sweet v. Parsley. In this case, Stephanie Sweet, the landlady of a house, was convicted under the Dangerous Drugs Act because traces of cannabis were found on the premises. Despite not being the one consuming the drugs, she was held liable. A natural law philosopher might argue that it is unreasonable to hold someone accountable for something they did not do. However, a positivist would support the conviction based on the fact that she had control over the property where the drugs were found.

Philosophical School or Natural Law: The Connection between Law and Morality

The philosophical school, also known as natural law, asserts that law is founded upon the connection between law and morality. Naturalists believe that an abundance of natural laws exists in nature and can be universally understood through human reason. These laws are considered inherent and superior to human laws. According to natural law theorists, laws that contradict moral principles are unjust and disrupt the peace and well-being of society.

An example of the connection between law and morality can be seen in the Declaration of Independence of the United States. The declaration states that all men are created equal and endowed with certain unalienable rights, such as life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. This demonstrates how natural law principles influenced the formation of the United States' legal system, emphasizing the inherent rights of individuals and the role of government in protecting those rights.

Analytical School or Positive Law: The State and Law

The analytical school, or positive law, focuses on the relationship between the state and law. According to positivist thinkers like John Austin, law is a command of the sovereign enforced through sanctions. In this perspective, the source of law is the command of a legal authority, and the fact of obedience is sufficient to determine its validity. A positivist would argue that the morality of a law is irrelevant if it has been approved by a legal authority.

However, this positivist approach has faced criticism. Scholars like Lon Fuller argue that separating law from morality is problematic. Fuller asserts that laws should contain both inner morality and substantive morality to pass the test of legality. He believes that an immoral enactment or command should not be considered a "law" and that the acts or orders of the sovereign can also be illegal.

Natural Law or Positive Law: The Battle of Perspectives

The natural law theory affirms the necessary link between law and morality, while positivism rejects this connection. Natural law theorists argue that laws should adhere to a basic standard of righteousness and should not enforce a high degree of injustice. They emphasize the importance of moral validity in determining the legality of a law. In contrast, positivists believe that a law's validity is established solely by its approval from a legal authority, regardless of its moral implications.

Considering both perspectives, it becomes clear that natural law has advantages over positive law. Natural law regards laws as adhering to a basic standard of righteousness, rather than being stringent and inflexible. It does not advocate for the complete abandonment of imperfect laws but suggests that there should not be complete injustice. Natural law promotes the idea that laws should have a moral and ethical backing to ensure the peace and well-being of society.

Natural Law and Its Rise in India

The Supreme Court of India has witnessed significant transformations in its approach to law. In the past, it adopted a strict positivist posture, considering law only as a 'lex' without examining its reasonableness and justice. However, landmark cases like Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India brought about a change in the court's stance. The court asserted that procedures established by law must be just, fair, and reasonable, and it interpreted the terms 'life' and 'personal liberty' in a wider sense under Article 21 of the Indian Constitution.

In India, the rise of natural law principles can be observed in the interpretation of Article 14 of the Constitution, which guarantees equality before the law. The Supreme Court has interpreted this provision in a wider sense, holding that even if a law does not violate the reasonable classification and intelligible differentia criteria, it can still be considered arbitrary. This expanded interpretation ensures that laws are not only judged based on technical criteria but also on their alignment with moral principles.

Conclusion: The Importance of Natural Law

The natural-positive law divide highlights the different perspectives on the relationship between law and morality. While positive law emphasizes the authority of the legal system, natural law underscores the importance of moral principles in shaping laws. Natural law ensures that laws adhere to a basic standard of righteousness and promotes the well-being and peace of society.

Although both schools of thought have their respective criticisms, the need for natural law is imperative in today's legal systems. Natural law allows for a connection between law and morality, providing a sense of purpose and ensuring that laws are not merely instruments of deterrence. By basing laws on morality, societies can strive for justice and uphold the inherent rights of individuals.

In conclusion, the natural-positive law divide sheds light on the complex relationship between law and morality. Understanding the distinctions between natural law and positive law allows us to appreciate the importance of morality in shaping legal systems. By recognizing the significance of natural law, we can work towards creating just and equitable societies.

For the latest updates on legal matters, visit LegalStix Law School