An effective government needs to establish and consistently maintain absolute authority for the safety the commonwealth, in so doing, the safety of the sovereign. If each individual is to decide for themselves whether to obey the government or not, uprisings and resistance against the government will occur, resulting in dissenting disagreements and civil war. Secondly, what is said to be actions of “goodness” and what is said to be actions of “evil”, are legislated by the civil law, who is representative of the Commonwealth. Hence, if every private individual was to be his own judge of what is good and evil, debates and disputes would arise concerning what the sovereign has decreed regarding actions in the prior regards. The commonwealth would thus be distracted and
Veil piercing is one of the most litigated issue in the area of company law. In the United Kingdom, the views of the courts in veil piercing cases are inconsistent towards both the desire for equitable outcome and the classification of such cases. Accordingly, a number of judges and scholars describe this doctrine as a “incomprehensible mess”. However, taking the starting point from the functions and nature of veil piercing, this paper presents a critical view about the abovementioned opinion. To do this, a variety of methodologies are adopted, comprising analytical study, case studies approach, historical research and sociological approach.
However, the law is the law, and when disobeyed whether unjust or just, consequences will be determined “by the code of the law”. However, human rights must be acknowledged when superiors make laws, and if they are not these laws must be revised, removed and/or
In addition, Since the Constitution is so short, so old along these lines hard to change, for it to be serious to contemporary society it obliges understanding by the courts and at last it is the Supreme Court which figures out what the Constitution implies. There are altogether different methodologies to the understanding of the Constitution with the two primary strands of thought being known as originalism and the Living Constitution. Originalism is a guideline of translation that tries to find the first importance or expectation of the constitution. It is focused around the standard that the legal shouldn't make, alter or annulment laws yet just to maintain them. This approach has a tendency to be underpinned by progressives.
It is also important that there is a kind of reliance that the agreements will be kept. In chapter 17, Hobbes presents a solution for a commonwealth, where people in numbers consent to the single sovereign authority to have complete control over them by repressing some of the freedoms and enforce laws to safeguard order within a state. The Leviathan is described as a single body built up by components of citizens, constructed through agreement to surrender in obedience to this single authority, so as to flee from bringing destruction from one another. However the true liberties as outlined in chapter 21 of the Leviathan are not oppressive and establish the terms in which the authority is absolute only as it instructs its subjects in its proper use. (Carmichael,
‘Right to Know’ – a Fundamental Right One of the basic features of a flourished democratic nation is the bestowing of right to know on its citizen. Article 19 (1) (a) of the Constitution of India impliedly covers ‘right to know’. In S.P. Gupta v. Union of India , it was held that right to know is implicit in the right of free speech and expression. Disclosure of information regarding functioning of the Government must be the rule.
First Importance of Freedom of Speech and Expression is the protection of democratic government. This freedom is essential for the proper functioning of the democratic process. The freedom of speech and expression is regarded as the first condition of liberty. Second importance of free speech as a basic and valuable feature of society cannot be underestimated. Freedom of speech serves a number of functions.
A healthy democracy is sustained by informing and making aware the citizens of conflicting and differing points of view and any inroads into the freedom of speech and expression, and any rules made in the form of imposing curbs thereon would violate Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution. Such are not saved by Article 19(2)9 of the Constitution. Freedom of speech is an essential feature of any genuine Democracy. The right of freedom of expression is crucial in a democracy, information ideas help to inform political debate and are essential to public accountability and transparency in government, for a democratic system to function, people have to be able to form their own ideas. One must be able to receive many different ideas and information, reflecting many different perspectives, before being able to see the truth.
International law must prevail in order to have equality among each individual in the world because international law protects the people over the unethical municipal laws of a certain country or state. International law gives standard and protocol to states. The law prevents abuses of the state and promotes absolute gain among state and state actors. The monist point of view is in connected to theory of harmonization of international law. According to Andenas(2008) In order to have a fixed legal international system, harmonization of law is important.
In the light of guaranteeing individual rights which were considered necessary by the framers of the Constitution. The right to Freedom in Article 19 certifies the Freedom of Speech and Expression as one of the six Freedoms. Freedom of Speech and Expression means the right of a person to express his or her ideas and opinions. It accommodates the portrayal of an individual’s idea through any communicable medium or visual representation. This expression also includes publication and hence freedom of press also lies under this wing.