Law is one of the fundamental elements of any human society, with some degree of legislation forming integral parts

of human communities from time immemorial. In essence the function of aw is to tell people what they can do, while laying down what they cannot do. The tree important themes to be discussed are firstly the origins and purpose of law, secondly the concept of order in law, and finally the relationship between law and justice. Law Simply defined as a means of enforcing norms or standards of social behaviour, however political theorists see it more of a distinctive social institution above norms and social behavioural standards. Law constitutes a set of rules, devised by government that are to take precedence over all the other so called rules that dictate and influence day to day life. Law is compulsory they must be obeyed, a system of punishment and coercion is employed by the government to ensure that they are indeed obeyed. Law has a public uality, in that it is a published set of rules that are presumed to be known by all. Laws are considered to be binding upon those to whom they apply.

The !ule of Law " constitutional principle that is applied to its fullest in the liberal democracies of global society. It simply means that everybody is subject to the laws of the state, and it is regarded as a tool for the protection of the rights of the individual.

#rawn up by #icey, the following points are the ape$ of this philosophy. %. '. ). +. &o one should be punished e$cept fro breaches of the law. ( ual subjection to the law e uality of all before the law. *ertainty of punishment when the law has been broken. !ule of law re uires that the rights and liberties of the ppl are embodied in the law of the land. Thus the people can ensure that when the law is upheld, so are their fundamental rights.

In a number of respects the ,ritish system is that one that least adheres to the principals put forward by this philosophy. In itself the notion of parliamentary supremacy violates the very essence of the rule of law. The establishment of effective of rule of law in the -. will re uire the codification of the constitution and the introduction of a bill of rights as well as a more distinct separation of power. In its broader sense the !/L is just outline of constitutionalism and limited government, the seemingly desired goals of modern liberal democracies. It limits the powers of the state ands establishes patterns of legal activity, such as the non0 retrospectivity of legislation.

&atural and 1ositive law !elationship between law and morality. Law and morality are prima facie very different entities. Law prescribes what can and cannot be done, while morality outlines what should and should not be done. 1lato felt that beyond the ever changing aspects of social interaction there were unchanging archetypal forms which only the philosopher kings could be aware of. "ristotle also thought along such lines in that he felt that there was a perfect law fi$ed for all times and this would be the basis of citi2enship and all other social interaction. Thomas " uinas also thought of this moral basis behind all human laws, which would serve as the path to the attainment of the good life on earth. The e$pression of this natural law is based in the e$pression of natural rights, invested in man by 3od or nature. Locke felt that it was mankind4s duty to protect these rights. Today it is widely accepted that there is an element of moral principles that should guide the formation of legislation, even on the international spectrum.

This principle was attacked by the notion of positive law. 5obbes felt that 6law is the word of him that by right hath command over others7. There was a belief that law was law because law was obeyed. 5art attempted a modern interpretation of this principle, in his The *oncept of Law, where he suggested that law stems from the union of primary and secondary rules. 1rimary rules regulate human conduct while secondary ones regulate what powers can be used by the powers that run the country.

&atural law theories were criticised for being too philosophical while positive law threatens to tear law away from morality e.g. 5obbes said that man should obey law no matter how oppressive. &atural law theorists seek to establish what law is and what it should be, while positivists treat these matters as utterly distinct from one another. Law and Liberty Important issue when discussing law is the issue of individual liberty and the balance between those moral choices that should be made by the individual and those that should be decided by society and thus enforced by law. 8ill4s proclaimed 6over himself, over his own body and mind the individual is sovereign7. " fierce commitment to individual liberty, faith in human reason and the e$ercise of choice. ,ut unrestrained liberty would damage society. #evlin argues that there is a public morality which society has a right to enforce through the law. /ne should not enforce laws that the majority are against was his keynote observation.

!egardless morality is simply too important to be left out of the law and up to the individual. 9here the interests of society and the interests of the individual disagree the law must always take the side of the former. Order :ear of disorder and social instability is an underlying theme in 9estern political philosophy. *onservatives feel that man is prone to descend into anarchic mess if not regulated by stiff controlling legislation. "narchists feel that if left to their own devices men would find a natural harmonious balance. #iscipline and *ontrol /rder is linked to the ideas of discipline regulation and authority. Social order has to be imposed as it does not occur naturally. It is the notion of disorder and chaos that prompts us to resort to order, as a means of necessity. 5uman beings are intrinsically corrupt, and subse uently must be controlled and coerced into behaviour. 5obbes in Leviathan described the principal human inclination as 6a perpetual and restless desire for power after power that ceaseth only in death7. *onservatives declare that social order is a fragile balance that re uires a strong entity to keep alive. If any part is damaged the whole is threatened. Thus there is the need for traditional institutions like family and respect for established culture based up custom religion and tradition.

&atural 5armony " 1opular view among socialists and anarchists. They believe that social order can take the form of spontaneous harmony, regulated by the natural good sense of individuals themselves. !ousseau felt that man is not born corrupt, but they are corrupted by society itself. 5e said 6man is born free but everywhere he is in chains. Socialists argue that one of the fundamental cause of crime is the severe social divides that are brought about by capitalist systems. They argue that social order can be applied into a system that emphasises social solidarity in an easier way, as opposed to one founded on competition and selfishness.

;ustifying punishment 1unishment has a moral character that distinguishes it, thus it must be justified in moral terms. Three types of such justifications have been defined throughout time. %. Idea of !etribution to punish wrongdoers is not merely to treat them as they deserve to be treated, but also it is necessary to e$press the revulsion of society towards their crime. It advocates an 6eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth7 approach to punishment. Society has a moral obligation to kill a murderer to demonstrate its abhorrence for the act he committed. " more primitive approach to punishment. '. the #eterrence theory this is more concerned with harnessing punishment in order to deter others from committing the same crime. The general

prevention ought to be the chief end of punishment as it is its real justification. It aims to deter people from crime by making them very aware of the conse uences should the resort to crime. #eterrence theory may justify far harsher punishments that retributive justice in order to make an e$ample of a wrongdoer. <ictimises the wrongdoer for the sake of deterring others. ). !eform or !ehabilitation the purpose is to educate rather than to penalise. It views punishment as a form of personal engineering designed to produce better people through a process of re0education, moulding human nature. Justice ;ustice denotes a particular kind of moral judgement, in particular about the distribution of rewards as well as punishment. Two forms of justice arise as the ones that are at work within the legal process. 1rocedural ;ustice !elates to how rules are made and applied. It can be either 1ure procedural justice where the uestion of justice is determined by the application of just procedures =e.g. winning a race>, or on the other hand there is a prior knowledge of what is just as the outcome is generally foreseen =as in court of law>. :ormal e uality law should operate fairly for all, regardless of gender race etc?.this in itself re uires law to be impartially applied, which can only be done by an independent judiciary. Substantive justice Legal process may generate injustice not because the procedure is unjust but because the law itself is unjust, the content of the law must be judged in the light of a principle of substantive justice. #evlin said that there is a distinction between laws@ *onsensus laws and &on *onsensus laws. The former conform to commonly held standards of fairness and justice, the latter are regarded as unacceptable or unjust normally reflected in widespread non0conformity to such law. 5e does not say tit is justified to defy such law, but he does state that the continued enforcement of said law will bring the judiciary and legal system to disrepute.