Modern Rule Of Law Analysis

1550 Words7 Pages
Rule of Law is a dynamic concept but it is somewhat difficult to define. Every person has its own way of defining rule of law some think it to be the supremacy of law; some think it to be the principles like clarity, universality, stability etc. The modern concept of "Rule of Law" was developed by the International Commission of jurists in 1959, which was later on confirmed at Lagos in 1961. The Jurists recorded that "Rule of law" depended not only on the existence of adequate safeguards against the abuse of power by the executive but also on the existence of effective Government capable of maintaining law and order and ensuring social and economic conditions of life for society. The Jurists expressed that there
…show more content…
The ideals of the Constitution i.e. justice, liberty and equality are enshrined in the preamble. For a democratic government, rule of law is a basic requirement. The rule of law runs like a golden thread through every provision of the Constitution and unquestionably constitutes one of its basic features, which requires that every organ of the state must act within the confines of powers conferred upon it by the Constitution and by law. The Constitution of India has been made the supreme law of the country and other laws are required to be in conformity with the Constitution. Any law which is found in violation of any provision of the Constitution is declared invalid. We have adopted the British System of Rule of Law. Absence of arbitrary power is the first essential of Rule of Law upon which our whole constitutional system is based. Governance must be by rule, and not arbitrary, vague and fanciful. Under our Constitution, the Rule of Law pervades over the entire field of administration and every organ of the state is regulated by Rule of Law. Part III of the Constitution of India guarantees the Fundamental Rights. Article 13(l) of the Constitution makes it clear that all laws in force in the territory of India immediately before the commencement of the Constitution, in so far as they are inconsistent with the provision of Part III dealing with the Fundamental Rights, shall, to the extent of such…show more content…
The right to these freedoms is not absolute, but subject to the reasonable restrictions which may be imposed by the State. Article 20(1) provides that no person shall he convicted of any offence except for violation of a law in force at the time of the commission of the act charged as an offence not be subject to a penalty greater than that which might have been inflicted in the law in at the time of the commission of the offence. According to Article 20(2), no person shall be prosecuted and punished for the same offence more than once. Article 20(3) makes it clear that no person accused of the offence shall be compelled to be witness against himself. In India, Constitution is supreme and the three organs of the Government viz. Legislature, Executive and judiciary are subordinate to it. The Constitution provided for encroachment of one organ (E.g.: Judiciary) upon another (E.g.: Legislature) if its action is mala fide, as the citizen can challenge it under Article 32 and 226 of the Constitution. In India, the meaning of rule of law has been much expanded. It is regarded as a part of the basic structure of the Constitution and, therefore, it cannot be abrogated or destroyed even by Parliament. It is
Open Document