Introduction
The rule of law had been a distinguished part of the constitution of India. It had made its name not only as the pinnacle of public welfare policies, but also a major weapon against any illicit affairs which might arise during the complex functioning of the state.
However, there arises the question, as to what limit must we let the principle interact with the other fields, necessary for decision making process of the country. We live in fear that at some point one field might grasp too tightly and too strongly on the principle and corrupt it with favoritism. What I mean here to say is that the intermixing of the other branches might lead the rule of law becoming lax in resolving the arbitrariness. While the economic might want more representation, there are chances that the politician’s corrupt practices might hinder the rule of law to fully carry out its aim and accomplish what Dicey had put imagined.
Therefore, in this paper, we will discuss the efficacy of letting the fields of Politics and Economics to interact with rule of law, and what are the consequence of rampant interaction of these fields.
Rule of Law
The term “rule of law” originates from the French phrase “La Principe de Legalite” which literally means the principle of legality, which infers that there is a government based solely on principles of law and justice, untouched by human biasness and greed, therefore, sans arbitrariness of a ruler. Such is an utopian government, which exists to uphold the law and order and is itself ideal and an idol of justice. More aptly, it is the concept which should, lay down as the foundation of every modern democratic society, and is an aim which many countries, democratic or else, still seeks to establish. I would not be going extreme in saying that rule of law still eludes many so-called democratic countries in the world.
The rule of law must exist in a democratic system to ensure that the country functions in consonance with the ideals of justice and law rather than have a chaotic decision-making on the whims of men. The concept is a crucial variable in achieving the aims of political ideals. It was first used by Edward Coke, who said that the King is under God and law, and therefore establishing the supremacy of Law over man. Ergo, a country which ensures that ensures that rule of law is the grundnorm[1] of the country, so is to say the basic law, from which we may derive authority of our actions as a government of state. In such concept the King or the government is not the law but rather, the law is the king.[2]
The theory of rule of law is majorly applied in the field of constitutional law and administrative law, both of which deals with the functioning of the country’s system, rights and good governance.
Professor A. V Dicey had formulated three main pillars of rule of law. These principles of: Supremacy of Law, Equality Before Law and Predominance of Legal Spirit, according to Dicey, were the core values of Rule of Law.[3]
Economics and Rule of Law
It is important to consider the interference Economic consideration could cause in the application of the rule of law. When we take economic measures into consideration it becomes clear that the economic prosperity makes it much easier to attain the objectives of rule of law. Indian intellectuals have long emphasized the link between economic development and the rule of law. Kautilya, an Indian philosopher and royal advisor, wrote in his 4th century BC political treatise, the Arthashastra, that “the Rule of Law and the maintenance of order is the science of governance.” Kamandaks wrote in his book on political thought, Nitisara, that “no branch of knowledge and policy is of any avail if the Rule of Law is neglected.”
Economic institutions require the rule of law, including control of corruption and enforcement of private property rights. The World Bank defines the rule of law as the degree to which citizens trust and follow society’s laws, including the quality of contract enforcement, property rights, police and courts, and the likelihood of crime and violence. This mutually reinforcing interdependence shows that corruption is a persistent occurrence that can only be addressed by having an effective judicial system that upholds the rule of law. You need arbitrators and people who can enforce contracts coercively if necessary; The need for Honest judge and humble police can only be fulfilled with rule of law. Over-legislation and governmental overreach are fundamental impediments to the rule of law in India, enabling only those who know how to game the system. As a result, there is an unmanageable and often arbitrary overabundance of laws and regulations that, by their sheer volume, hinder individual freedom and enterprise while concentrating a great deal of power in the hands of the political class. The government has a minimal role in a free-market economy, and the large majority of transactions are voluntary between private entities. The enforcement of contracts between the parties is pivotal to the survival of these transactions. Whenever controversies emerge, the legal system must provide an organized and efficient method for settling them. A well-established, precise, and consistent rule of law creates predictability and eliminates disputes.[4]
It does not look very desirable to exclude and separate the economic considerations while applying rule of law and trying to accomplish it. The economic prosperity of a country reflects the results of how well we had applied the principles of rule of law and where the proper application still lacks.
Politics and Rule of Law
It would be skeptic of me to suggest economics as a tool of rule of law and to discard politics as nothing but interference. However, ultimately both the field of politics and economics too are interconnected with one another, and the past had thought us that it is extremely irresponsible to study two field independently even though we know their alignments.
As it is so often quoted, democracy is a government of the people, for the people and by the people, and it shall not perish from this earth. I believe that the in the political sphere it is demanded that the public welfare is put forward the most, and when such is not done or no efforts are made to accomplish such discourse, the rule of law applies itself to help change the government and to carry on what is necessary for the good of society. After all the rule of law signifies “government of laws, not of men”.
And yet, rule of law is apathetic about the distinctions between federalism and Unitarianism, republicanism and monarchy, secularism and theocracy, and flexible versus rigid constitutional structures. It does not exclude options about the scope and process of altering constitutions. Within the rule of law, the languages, the composition of judicial power and the administration of justice (methods of judicial selection, tenure, and removal of judges, compositions of judicial hierarchies, etc.) remain absolutely open.[5] The political decision to make laws is nothing more than the “positivization of unfairness”.[6] However, this arbitrariness is obscured by disciplinary internationalization, in which the political influencers are favored and policies made in an attempt to favor the leaders and politicians, these obligations are facilitated by transnational corporations and international financial institutions, which themselves owe very little democratic accountability and transparency.
Therefore, I am more partial to the fact that it is the politics which must be targeted, and its corruptions must be rooted out for the welfare of economics, public and India, and to ensure proper flow of Rule of Law throughout the nation. The separation of both fields exists to create a restriction, in order to make sure that no one field influences the functioning of the country. IN the Constitution, Rule of Law must not revolve around just economic welfare, or political welfare, but must harmonize a balance between the two and achieve the goals which Dicey’ had put forward.
Conclusion
The rule of law provides a blanket protection to the Indian legal system and the country’s people. It is something which must remain present in every aspects of decision making, from laying down a newly built highway to changing the foreign policies. Without the order of rule of law the nation would descent in a state of chaos; madness.
It is because of such a burden of responsibility that this principle must bear, that it would be irrational to let it remain isolated from other fields necessary for decision making, of which we have considered two i.e., Economics and Politics. These two fields are also, in some sense, a pillar which holds our system together, but it is together with rule of law that they create the failsafe. Therefore, it remains imperative that both the fields remain in mutual interaction with the rule of law.
References:
[1] Mridushri Swarup, Kelsen’s Theory of Grundnorm, Manupatra (2014), http://manupatra.com/roundup/330/Articles/Article%201.pdf.
[2] Thomas Paine, Common Sense, (W. & T. Bradford 1994).
[3] A.V. Dicey, Introduction to The Study of The Law of The Constitution, (10th edition, 1985).
[4] Sanjiv Bhagat, Rule of Law for the Economy: India Needs Umpires, India Legal (Nov. 30, 2019), https://www.indialegallive.com/cover-story-articles/focus/rule-of-law-for-the-economy-india-needs-umpires/.
[5] http://socialsciences.scielo.org/pdf/s_sur/v3nse/scs_a01.pdf
[6] Clemens Mattheis, The System Theory of Niklas Luhmann and the Constitutionalization of the World Society, 4 Gottingen Journal of Int’l Law (2012).
0 Comments