The Doctrine of Rule of Law is a cornerstone of democratic governance, ensuring that all actions are conducted within a legal framework, thereby preventing arbitrary use of power.
MEANING, DEFINITION & EXPLANATION
The term ‘Rule of Law‘ originates from the French phrase ‘la principe de legalite,’ meaning the principle of legality, which emphasizes governance based on laws rather than individual discretion. A.V. Dicey, a British jurist, articulated this doctrine with three core principles:
-
Supremacy of Law: Law is supreme, and no individual is above it. This principle opposes arbitrary power and ensures that punishment is only for breaches of law established through due process.
-
Equality Before Law: Every individual, regardless of status, is subject to the same laws administered by ordinary courts. This ensures non-discrimination and equal protection under the law.
-
Predominance of Legal Spirit: Rights are protected through judicial decisions, emphasizing the role of courts in upholding individual liberties.
HISTORICAL BACKGROUND / EVOLUTION
The concept of Rule of Law can be traced back to ancient civilizations. In India, its roots are found in the Upanishads, which state that law is the king of kings, emphasizing its supremacy over all individuals, including monarchs. In modern times, the doctrine was popularized by A.V. Dicey in his 1885 work “Introduction to the Study of the Law of the Constitution,” where he outlined its foundational principles.
COMPARISON WITH OTHER COUNTRIES
While the Rule of Law is a universal principle, its application varies across countries:
-
United Kingdom: Dicey’s model emphasizes parliamentary sovereignty, where no person is punishable except for a breach of law established in the ordinary legal manner before the ordinary courts.
-
United States: The U.S. Constitution embodies the Rule of Law through a written constitution and a strong emphasis on judicial review, ensuring that no law or executive act is above the Constitution.
-
India: The Indian Constitution incorporates the Rule of Law, ensuring that all laws are consistent with constitutional provisions, and emphasizes judicial review to uphold fundamental rights.
ESSENTIALS / ELEMENTS / PRE-REQUISITES
The effective implementation of the Rule of Law requires:
-
Clear and Publicized Laws: Laws must be accessible, clear, and stable to guide behavior.
-
Equality Before the Law: All individuals and institutions are accountable under the law.
-
Independent Judiciary: Courts must be impartial and independent to enforce laws fairly.
-
Access to Justice: Legal processes should be accessible to all, ensuring that rights are protected.
LEGAL PROVISIONS / PROCEDURE / SPECIFICATIONS / CRITERIA
In India, the Constitution embodies the Rule of Law through various provisions:
-
Article 14: Ensures equality before the law and equal protection of laws within the territory of India.
-
Article 21: Guarantees the right to life and personal liberty, stating that no person shall be deprived of these except according to the procedure established by law.
-
Article 32 and 226: Empower individuals to approach the Supreme Court and High Courts, respectively, for the enforcement of fundamental rights, ensuring judicial review.
CASE LAWS / PRECEDENTS / OVERRULING JUDGMENTS
Several landmark judgments have reinforced the Rule of Law in India:
-
Keshavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala, AIR 1973 SC 1461: This case established the Doctrine of Basic Structure, asserting that the Rule of Law is a fundamental feature of the Constitution that cannot be altered by parliamentary amendments.
- Facts: The petitioner challenged the constitutional validity of the Kerala government’s land reform laws, claiming they violated his fundamental rights.
- Issue: Whether Parliament’s power to amend the Constitution was unlimited.
- Held: The Supreme Court held that while Parliament can amend the Constitution, it cannot alter its basic structure, which includes the Rule of Law.
-
Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India, AIR 1978 SC 597: The Court expanded the interpretation of Article 21, emphasizing that any law affecting life and personal liberty must be just, fair, and reasonable, thereby reinforcing the Rule of Law.
- Facts: Maneka Gandhi’s passport was impounded by the government without providing reasons.
- Issue: Whether the procedure established by law under Article 21 must be fair and reasonable.
- Held: The Supreme Court held that the procedure affecting life and liberty must be fair, just, and reasonable, ensuring protection against arbitrary actions.
-
ADM Jabalpur v. Shivakant Shukla, AIR 1976 SC 1207: Also known as the Habeas Corpus case, the majority held that during the Emergency, the right to seek judicial remedy for enforcement of fundamental rights remains suspended. However, Justice H.R. Khanna’s dissent emphasized the inviolability of the Rule of Law, even during emergencies.
- Facts: During the Emergency, several individuals were detained without trial, and the right to approach courts was suspended.
- Issue: Whether the right to judicial remedy for enforcement of fundamental rights is suspended during an Emergency.
- Held: The majority held that during an Emergency, the right to approach courts is suspended. Justice Khanna’s dissent, however, emphasized that even in emergencies, the Rule of Law prevails, and courts should have the authority to review detentions.
DOCTRINES / THEORIES
The Rule of Law intersects with several legal doctrines:
- Doctrine of Basic Structure: Asserts that certain fundamental features of the Constitution, including the Rule of Law, cannot be altered by amendments.
