What challenges would we face in a world without the Rule of Law?

Where law ends, there tyranny begins.1 This statement is made by a great philosopher, John Locke in 1690. What does Philosopher Locke mean by this statement? In my view, it is just a beginning when a world without rule of law. If a world without rule of law, can you imagine that it brings us poverty, desperate, suffer and unjust. We can even say that there is no democracy and human rights will be existed under a world without rule of law. Thus, people are no way to seek for justice because they have no place to go, seek and search for justice. People will be lived in frighten and even darkness, a place with no bright of hopes. All of this is just because a world without rule of law.

However, does rule of law still exist if no rule of law in this world? This answer may vague but also obvious. Why? It is vagueness because there is no formal procedure to legislate about rule of law or the legislation without stating it clear but it is obvious when rule of law is written down in black and white with unequivocal constitution and enforced by people. So, the reality is even no written document about rule of law but as long as if a single portion of law or regulation is enforced by people, there already have the existence of the rule of law.

The first challenge would we face is the problem of imbalance in separation of powers between with country, the effect of imbalance in separation of powers will produce some issues such as boundary disputes. World War II is a good example to show that what will happen if a world without rule of law. World War II is the continuous of World War I where due to ambitious of Hitler (Adolf Hitler wanted more land, especially in the east, to expand Germany according to the Nazi policy of lebensraum.)2 And after World War I, an unfair treatment to Germany (Treaty of Versailles) had been established to prevent Germany to declare war again.3 The cause of imbalance in separation of powers between with country is due to dissatisfaction of our politicians leaders, their desire, want and ambitious which made them want to conquer others country such as Hitler wanted to conquer all over the world. Moreover, Treaty of
1 2

Tom Bingham, Tom Bingham: The Rule of Law(Penguin Group, London 2011)8 Available at http://history1900s.about.com/od/worldwarii/a/wwiistarts.htm accessed on 9 July 2012. 3 Available at http://www.historyonthenet.com/WW2/causes.htm accessed on 9 July 2012.

Page 1 of 8

Versailles had became an excuse for Germany to swallow up others country though Treaty of Versailles is an unfair treatment for Germany. 4 So, Germany had begun World War II in 1 September 1939 which Germany invades Poland at first with participating of others country such as Britain and France declare war on Germany two days later by the reason of invasion of Poland.5 If a world without rule of law, boundary disputes are the main reason why imbalance of separation of powers will occur such as the case of Hitler. During the era of World War II, the stability of rule of law had not been settled down. (Example: Failure of Treaty of Versailles.) So, it caused the imbalance separation of powers whereby some countries are stronger and weaker. A peaceful world is incorporated with strong and weak country with equality in separation of power which means no any country should obey to any other country.

The second challenge would we face is the problem of abuse of power under royal prerogative. In Dicey, our great philosopher describes the prerogative that the residue of discretionary or arbitrary authority, which at any time is legally left in the hands of the CrownEvery Act which the executive government can lawfully do without the authority of an Act of Parliament is done in virtue of this prerogative.6 In my view, Dicey may be right in his era but it does not apply to our modern world but what Dicey had said, it still exists in our modern world which royal prerogative had never been abolished completely. A good example reflects what Dicey had said is the declaration of war to Iraq by United States Americas former president, George Bush in 2003.7 George Bush abused the prerogative power to invade Iraq by an excuse that the case of 9/11 is directed by Iraq and Bushs attack to Iraq is reasonable. 8 Although George Bush had been charged based on Criminal Act 1971 and Criminal Justice and Public Order Act respectively in considering the legality of Iraq War by House of Lord with reference a case (R v Jones (Margaret))9 However, George Bush had been acquitted10 by the reason of under royal

4 5

Available at http://history1900s.about.com/od/worldwarii/a/wwiistarts.htm accessed on 9 July 2012. Available at http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/worldwars/wwtwo/ww2_summary_01.shtml accessed on 9 July 2012. 6 th Hilaire Barnett, Constitutional & Administrative Law (8 edn Routledge, London 2011)108 7 Available at http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A17347-2004Apr16.html/ accessed on 10 July 2012. 8 Available at http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A17347-2004Apr16.html/ accessed on 10 July 2012. 9 R v Jones (Margaret) [2006] UKHL 16.

Page 2 of 8

prerogative in categories of foreign affairs (the power to make declarations of war and peace) 11 Thus, the court did not consider to inquire such areas which in case of R (Bancoult) v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs (No 2)12. Thus, it also against the Lord Binghams 4th principle which stated as follow: Ministers and public officers at all levels must exercise the powers conferred on them in good faith, fairly, for the purpose for which the powers were conferred, without exceeding the limits of such powers and unreasonably. 13 Obviously, George Bushs action is already against the Lord Binghams 4th principle in rule of law, in my opinion, Bushs excuse is unreasonably and abused the prerogative power which exceeds the limit of such powers but Bush had leveraged the loopholes in rule of law to escape his responsibility away. All of this reflects that if a world without rule of law or ignore the existence of rule of law, the consequences would be happened that everyone could also be had their prerogative especially leaders such as George Bush and Hitler.

The third challenge would we face is no human rights. In some developing countries, a higher premium is put on economic growth than on protection of individual rights such as China.14 We must be accepted that the outer-edges of some fundamental human rights are not clear-cut.15 In Blackstone, in his commentaries, said of freedom of the press that the liberty of the press is indeed essential to the nature of a free state. Every free man has an undoubted right to lay what sentiments he pleases before the public; to forbid this is to destroy the freedom of the press; but if he publishes what is improper, mischievous or illegal, he must take the consequences of his own temerity.16 In my view, I agree with what Blackstone had said, but, unfortunately, freedom of expression subject to the limitations imposed by law which means sometimes human rights is cannot be enforceable in some circumstances and we may also be

10

Available at http://articles.cnn.com/2011-02-14/opinion/frum.bush.war.crimes_1_bush-opponents-bushappearance-torture?_s=PM:OPINION accessed on 10 July 2012. 11 Hilaire Barnett, Understanding Public Law (Routledge, London 2010)13 12 R (Bancoult) v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs (No 2), [2007] EWCA Civ 498. 13 Tom Bingham, Tom Bingham: The Rule of Law(Penguin Group, London 2011)60 14 Available at http://www.hrw.org/legacy/backgrounder/asia/china-bck-0701.htm accessed on 10 July 2012. 15 Tom Bingham, Tom Bingham: The Rule of Law (Penguin Group, London 2011)68 16 th Hilaire Barnett, Constitutional & Administrative Law (8 edn Routledge, London 2011)552

Page 3 of 8

attracted to criminal or civil offences.17 A good example has shown in China where China has no human rights in category of freedom in expression. Since 1995, when Chinese authorities began permitting commercial Internet accounts, at least sixty sets of regulations have been issued aimed at controlling Internet content.18 The broadly-worded regulations represent a clear violation of the right to freedom of expression, and the government is devoting considerable time and resources to trying to implement them.19 As of January 2001, sending "secret" or "reactionary" materials over the Internet became a capital crime.20 Generally, however, persons convicted for their use of the Internet have received sentences of between two and four years, and we are not aware of anyone having been charged under Internet-specific regulations.21 Instead, they have all been found guilty of violating provisions of the Criminal Code.22 In Lord Binghams 7th principle stated that Adjudicative procedures provided by the state should be fair.23 In my understandings, it means everyone should have a fair trial while seeking for justice in court. However, it does not apply to every country such as China. Example, one of the cases which were happened in China such as Guo Qinghai (Guo Qinghai is a freelance writer in China, was arrested on September 15, 2000. On April 3, a court in Cangzhou, Hebei province tried and sentenced him to four years in prison. Guo was charged with "inciting to overthrow state political power." Guo had posted some forty articles on the Internet and published in the Hong Kong based magazine Kaifang calling for political reform. No one informed the family before the two-hour trial began, and as a result no family member attended. Guo did not have a lawyer for his defense.)24 In this case, obviously, when a China citizen committed a crime, (Innocent offences of any China citizen) he or she has no chances to defense for themselves because fair trial is under many restrictions and limitations from China government.

17 18

Hilaire Barnett, Constitutional & Administrative Law (8 edn Routledge, London 2011)552 Available at http://www.hrw.org/legacy/backgrounder/asia/china-bck-0701.htm accessed on 10 July 2012. 19 Available at http://www.hrw.org/legacy/backgrounder/asia/china-bck-0701.htm accessed on 10 July 2012. 20 Available at http://www.hrw.org/legacy/backgrounder/asia/china-bck-0701.htm accessed on 10 July 2012. 21 Available at http://www.hrw.org/legacy/backgrounder/asia/china-bck-0701.htm accessed on 10 July 2012. 22 Available at http://www.hrw.org/legacy/backgrounder/asia/china-bck-0701.htm accessed on 10 July 2012. 23 Tom Bingham, Tom Bingham: The Rule of Law (Penguin Group, London 2011)90 24 Available at http://www.hrw.org/legacy/backgrounder/asia/china-bck-0701.htm accessed on 10 July 2012.

th

Page 4 of 8

However, we cannot conclude that all country over the world do not have human rights. There is an exception to Europe and United Kingdom because Europe has European Convention on Human Rights and United Kingdom has Human Right Act 1998. Human Right Act 1998 is adopted and interpreted from European Convention on Human Rights but United Kingdom does not follow exactly in European Convention Human Rights because due to United Kingdoms supremacy in parliament sovereignty. European Convention on Human Rights is more clear-cut than United Kingdom. Example, freedom of expression is now regulated under Article 10 of European Convention on Human Rights (Freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart information and ideas without interference by public authority and regardless of frontiers.), incorporated into domestic law under the Human Rights Act 1998.25 However, the right is limited by restriction in Human Rights Act 1998.26 In my opinion, Europe and United Kingdom is better than other some countries such as China in terms of human rights. However, in my question, Does human rights really enforce fully in every country with no too many exceptions and harsh regulations? I would like to answer this question by Yes because I guess if by following the time passes and the rises of new era, human rights will be became important in every section of law. In fact, we can see the trend in human rights have become more and more important in our world today.

The last challenge would we face is the effect of economic if a world without rule of law. The rule of law is usually thought of as a political or legal matter.27 However, in the past ten years the rule of law has become important in economics too.28 Stability in rule of law will bring society peaceful, harmony and united. It also will bring wealth to people.29 Contrary, if a world without rule of law, the effect economic will be reversed from wealth and etc. This is because if a world without rule of law may bring us war. Example, World War II brought poverty and suffers to people which are side effect of war but it also brought extreme richness for people
25 26

Hilaire Barnett, Constitutional & Administrative Law (8 edn Routledge, London 2011)553 th Hilaire Barnett, Constitutional & Administrative Law (8 edn Routledge, London 2011)553 27 Available at http://www.economist.com/node/10849115 accessed on 10 July 2012. 28 Available at http://www.economist.com/node/10849115 accessed on 10 July 2012. 29 Available at http://www.economist.com/node/10849115 accessed on 10 July 2012.

th

Page 5 of 8

during war. During war, there is imbalance between richness and poverty because rich will be more and more rich, whereas, poor will be more and more poor. It is a signal of recession of economic under instability in rule of law or without rule of law in a world.

In a nutshell, there are connections between rule of law and few challenges as stated in above. If a world without rule of law, it will bring bad implications more than good implications to us. However, if a world has rule of law, it also will bring us good implications and even bad implications because rule of law can be adjusted by human being.

Page 6 of 8

Bibliography
Books Bingham, Tom, Tom Bingham: The Rule of Law (Penguin Group, London 2011) Barnett, Hilaire, Constitutional & Administrative Law (8th edn Routledge, London 2011) Barnett, Hilaire, Understanding Public Law (Routledge, London 2010) Article Peerenboom, R, The future of rule of law: challenges and prospects for the field (2009) HJRL 5 14 Electronic Sources Jennifer Rosenberg, World War II Starts http://history1900s.about.com/od/worldwarii/a/wwiistarts.htm accessed on 9 July 2012 The History on the Net Group, World War Two Causes http://www.historyonthenet.com/WW2/causes.htm accessed on 9 July 2012 Bruce Robinson, World War Two: Summary Outline of Key Events http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/worldwars/wwtwo/ww2_summary_01.shtml accessed on 9 July 2012 William Hamilton, Bush Began to Plan War Three Months After 9/11 http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A17347-2004Apr16.html/ accessed on 10 July 2012 David Frum, Charge George W. Bush with war crimes? http://articles.cnn.com/2011-0214/opinion/frum.bush.war.crimes_1_bush-opponents-bush-appearancetorture?_s=PM:OPINION accessed on 10 July 2012 --, Freedom of Expression and the Internet in China: A Human Rights Watch Backgrounder http://www.hrw.org/legacy/backgrounder/asia/china-bck-0701.htm accessed on 10 July 2012 The Economist, Economics and the rule of law: Order in the jungle http://www.economist.com/node/10849115 accessed on 10 July 2012

Page 7 of 8

Table of Statues and Cases

Table of Statues Human Rights Act 1998 c.42 Table of Cases R (Bancoult) v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs (No 2), [2007] EWCA Civ 498 R v Jones (Margaret) [2006] UKHL 16

Page 8 of 8