The very term rule of law suggests that the law itself is the sovereign, or the ruler, in a society. As an ideal, the rule of law stands for the proposition that no person or particular branch of government may rise above rules made by elected political officials. These laws reflect the morals of a society, and in a Western democracy they are supposed to be pre-established, formalized, neutral, and objective. Everyone is subject to their dictates in the same way. The rule of law, therefore, is supposed to promote equality under the law.
Critics of the rule of law, however, have noted that this system creates a ruling elite that has the power to manipulate through the law. As Harvard law professor and leader of the critical legal studies movement, Morton J. Horwitz, suggested, By promoting procedural justice [the rule of law] enables the shrewd, the calculating, and the wealthy to manipulate its forms to their own advantage. Scholars who agree with this statement see the law as indeterminate, meaning that the law has no clear or objective meaning. Consequently, the law cannot possibly serve as an effective barrier to the governments abuse of power because power structures in society, not the law itself, determine the outcome of legal issues and problems.
Because judicial interpretation and enforcement of the law is influenced by the ruling elite, the rule of law does nothing more than legitimize already existing legal relationships and power structures. The absence of predetermined outcomes coupled with the possible influence of the ruling elite means that the obligations of equality and predictability that the rule of law imposes are impossible to achieve. Although the rule of law appears to be objective, meaning that it is fairly applied to all people, it is actually subjective and unfairly applied. The rule of law theory has therefore gained an undeserved legitimacy in the modern world.
Partly responding to the criticism outlined above, some scholars have commented that part of the problem with the rule of law is its narrow conception. Instead of viewing the rule of law solely as a judicially focused book of rules, scholars should focus more on the informal and institutional constraints that restrict governments. For example, the moral and tradition-based restraints that societies impose on the government should be given greater consideration in reforms and the overall conception of the rule of law. These aspects of the rule of law are not subject to the same type of manipulation. This broader conception may help avoid situations in which the legal elite manipulate laws because by its definition the rule of law is not solely dependant on the judiciary, which often reflects the power of the elite, for its power.
Task 2: answer the following questions in a written form
a) What is the general meaning of such a notion as rule of law?
b) What is the score of critical approaches to the rule of law?
|
|
|
UNIT 2. What is a crime?
It is criminal to steal a purse,
It is criminal to steal a fortune,
It is a mark of greatness to steal a crown.
The blame diminishes as the guilt increases
(Johann Schiller [1759 1805])
Part 1
| Text: Why is there crime? Vocabulary in use Grammar: Participle (Progress check) |
Task 1: think over the following questions
1. Can a crime be deemed as a social event? 2. Are you insured against crime commitment? 3. What is the most perspective way to combat the crime? 4. What results of crimes are the most negative ones for a society - economic or moral?
Task 2: translate verb combinations with the word CRIME and the sentences below
| commit | report | activity | ||||
| clear up |
C R I M E
