Legal Positivists And Kelsen's Theory Of Law

1005 Words5 Pages
The interpretation of what is law is looked into by legal positivists like Kelsen and Hart. Kelsen says that law is an “instrument of social control”1. They are thought of as rules which are formed in order to compel performance of individuals. The effect of law is such that it can also prohibit an individual from performing a certain action. Kelson also says that “law is a social phenomenon, it is a social institution, and therefore, what the law is, is basically a matter of social facts”.2 Those theorists who are for this theory or in support of this theory are concerned with whether or not the law exists, whether or not the relevant authorities recognise the law rather than whether it is good or bad.Then comes HLA Hart who makes a distinction between law and morality. He put forth a this separation thesis by saying that what is in actual, morally wrong can still be right in the legal sense.These were the theories that were introduced by Hart and Kelsen, who happen to be legal positivists.

According to positivist observance , a law or a norm gets its title of law only when a recognised human authority declares it respectively. We can say that these legal positivists are concerned with the fact of whether or not it derives its validity from or is created by the sovereign.To them, morality does not play a central role , in fact it is irrelevant . A law is valid if the sovereign says so.
The roots or historical aspect of the law matters,that is , proper procedures must
Open Document