ASSIGNMENT OF JURISPRUDENCE

TOPIC- NATURAL LAW; AN OVERVIEW

Submitted to-
Ms. Shashya Mishra

(Professor)

Submitted by-
Madhumita Bose

(Student)

BBA LLB (H)

7th Semester

A8121513004

AMITY LAW SCHOOL

AMITY UNIVERSITY

Mango Orchard Campus, Malhaur

Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh.

 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

I would like to express my special Thanks of gratitude to my teacher Ms. Shashya

who gave me the golden opportunity to do this wonderful project on Natural Law
which also helped me in doing a lot of Research and I came to know about so
many new things I am really thankful to her. I am also thankful for her aspiring
guidance, invaluably constructive criticism and friendly advice during the project
work.

Secondly I would also like to thank my parents and friends who helped me a lot in
finalizing this project within the limited time frame. I am sincerely grateful to them
for sharing their truthful and illuminating views on a number of issues related to
the project.

Thank You,

Madhumita Bose.
 CONTENTS

1) Introduction
2) Conclusion
3) Bibliography
INTRODUCTION
The concept of natural law has taken several forms. The idea began with the ancient Greeks
conception of a universe governed in every particular by an eternal, immutable law and in their
distinction between what is just by nature and just by convention. Stoicism provided the most
complete classical formulation of natural law. The Stoics argued that the universe is governed by
reason, or rational principle; they further argued that all humans have reason within them and can
therefore know and obey its law. Because human beings have the faculty of choice (a free will),
they will not necessarily obey the law; if they act in accordance with reason, however, they will
be following nature.
Christian philosophers readily adapted Stoic natural law theory, indentifying natural law with the
law of God. For Thomas Aquinas, natural law is that part of the eternal law of God (the reason
of the divine wisdom) which is knowable by human beings by means of their powers of reason.
Human, or positive, law is the application of natural law to particular social circumstances. Like
the Stoics, Aquinas believed that a positive law that violates natural law is not true law.
With the secularization of society resulting from the Renaissance and Reformation, natural law
theory found a new basis in human reason. The 177th century Dutch jurist Hugo Grotius believed
that humans by nature are not only reasonable but social. Thus, the rules that are natural to
themthose dictated by reason aloneare those which enable them to live in harmony with one
another. From this argument, by the way, Grotius developed the first comprehensive theory of
international law.
Natural law theory eventually gave rise to a concept of natural rights. John Locke argued that
human beings in the state of nature are free and equal, yet insecure in their freedom. When they
enter society they surrender only such rights as are necessary for their security and for the
common good. Each individual retains fundamental prerogatives drawn from natural law relating
to the integrity of person and property (natural rights). This natural rights theory provided a
philosophical basis for both the American and French revolutions. Thomas Jefferson used the
natural law theory to justify his trinity of inalienable rights which were stated in the United
States Declaration of Independence.
During the 19th century natural law theory lost influence as utilitarianism and Benthams,
positivism, materialism, and the historical school of jurisprudence became dominant. In the 20 th
century, however, the natural law theory has received new attention, partly in reaction to the rise
of totalitarianism and an increased interest in human rights throughout the world. With this
contemporary interest in mind, lets now turn to our attention to the natural law theory as
understood by the tradition of Classical Realism.
In its simplest definition, natural law is that unwritten law that is more or less the same for
everyone everywhere. To be more exact, natural law is the concept of body of moral principles
that is common to all humankind and as, generally posited, is recognizable by human reason
alone. Natural law is therefore distinguished fromand provides a standard forpositive law,
the formal legal enactments of a particular society.
Since law must always be some dictate of reason, natural law also will be some dictate of reason.
In fact, it is the law discovered by human reason. Our normal and natural grasp of the natural law
is affected by reason, that is, by the thinking mind, and in this service reason is sometimes called
conscience. We, in all our human acts, inevitable see them in their relation to the natural law,
and we mentally pronounce upon their agreement or disagreement with the natural law. Such a
pronouncement may be called a judgment of conscience. The norm od morality is the natural
law as applied by conscience. Lastly, we can say that the natural law is the disposition of the
things as known by our human reason and to which we must conform ourselves if we are to
realize our proper end or good as human beings.

To sum it up, then, can say that the natural law:

Is not made by human beings;
Is based on the structure of reality itself;
Is the same for all human beings and at all times;
Is an unchanging rule or pattern which is there for human beings to discover;
Is a means by which human beings can rationally guide themselves to their good.
It is interesting to notes that virtually everyone seems to have some knowledge of natural law
even before such knowledge is codified and formalized. Even young children make an appeal to
fair play, demand that things be fair and square, and older children and adults often apply the
golden rule. When doing so, they are spontaneously invoking the natural law. This is why
many proponents of the natural law theory say it is the law which is written upon the hearts of
men

I. Kinds of Natural Law Theory

The first is a theory of morality. First, moral propositions have what is sometimes called
objective standing in the sense that such propositions are the bearers of objective truth- value;
that is, moral propositions can be objectively true or false. Though moral objectivism is
sometimes equated with moral realism, the relationship between the two theories is controversial.
Geoffrey Sayre- McCord, for example, views moral subjectivism and moral inter subjectivism
are also forms of moral realism. Strictly speaking, then, natural moral theory is committed only
to the objectivity of moral norms.
The second thesis constituting the core of natural law moral theory is the claim that standards of
morality are in some sense derived from, or entailed by, the nature of the world and the nature of
human beings. St. Thomas Aquinas, for eg., identifies the rational nature of human beings as that
which defined moral law: the rule and measure of human acts is the reason, which is the first
principle of human acts. On this common view, since human beings are by nature rational
beings, it is morally appropriate that they should behave in a way that conforms to their rational
nature. Thus, Aquinas derives the moral law from the nature of human beings (thus, natural
law).
But there is another kind of natural law theory having to do with the relationship of morality to
law. According to natural law theory of law, there is no clean division between the notion of law
and the notion of morality. Though there are different versions of natural law theory, all
subscribe to the thesis that there are at least some laws that depend for their authority not on
some pre-existing human convention, but on the logical relationship in which they stand to moral
standards. Otherwise put, some norms are authoritative in virtue of their moral content, even
when there is no convention that makes moral merit a criterion of legal validity. The idea that the
concepts of law and morality intersect in some way is called the Overlap Thesis.
As an empirical matter, many natural law moral theorists are also natural law legal theorists, but
the two theories, strictly speaking, are logically independent. One can deny natural law theory of
law but hold a natural law theory of morality. John Austin, the most influential of the early legal
positivists, for example, denied the Overlap Thesis but held something that resembles a natural
law ethical theory.
Indeed, Austin explicitly endorsed the view that it is not necessarily true that the legal validity of
a norm depends on whether its content conforms to morality. But while Austin thus denied the
Overlap Thesis, he accepted an objectivist moral theory; indeed, Austin inherited his
utilitarianism almost wholesale from J.S. Mill and Jeremy Bentham. Here it is worth noting that
utilitarian sometimes seem to suggest that they derive their utilitarianism from certain facts about
human nature; as Bentham once wrote, nature has placed mankind under the governance of two
sovereign masters, pain and pleasure. It is for them alone to point out what we ought to do, as
well as to determine what we shall do. On the one hand the standard of right and wrong, on the
other the chain of causes and effects, are fastened to their throne (Bentham 1948, 1). Thus, a
commitment to natural law theory of morality is consistent with the denial of natural law theory
of law.
Conversely, one could, though this would be unusual, accept a natural law theory of law without
holding a natural law theory of morality. One could, for example, hold that the conceptual point
of law is, in part, to reproduce the demands of morality, but also hold a form of ethical
subjectivism (or relativism). On this peculiar view, the conceptual point of law would be to
enforce those standards that are morally valid in virtue of cultural of cultural consensus. For this
reason, natural law theory of law is logically independent of natural law theory of morality. The
remainder of this essay will be exclusively concerned with natural law theories of law.

II. Conceptual Naturalism

a. The Project of Conceptual Jurisprudence
The principal objective of conceptual (or analytic) jurisprudence has traditionally been to provide
an account of what distinguishes law as a system of norms from other systems of norms, such as
ethical norms. As John Austin describes, conceptual jurisprudence seeks the essence or nature
which is common to all laws that are properly so called. Accordingly, the task of conceptual
jurisprudence is to provide a set of necessary and sufficient conditions for the existence of law
that distinguishes law from non- law in every possible world.
While this task is usually interpreted as an attempt to analyse the concepts of law and legal
system, there is

CONCLUSION
 Constitution is the supreme and fundamental law of our country. Since it is written in the
form of a statute, the general principles of statutory interpretation are applicable to interpretation
of the constitution as well.

The abovementioned issue relating to environmental protection and conservation was one of the
paramount pillars, amongst others, of the adjudicatory process by the Tribunal. It was expected
to dispose of cases relating to above matters expeditiously. This is the first indicator of the
legislative intent which provides that a case could relate to environmental protection,
conservation of forests and other natural resources or even enforcement of legal rights relating to
environment and other matters mentioned thereto. This jurisdiction of the Tribunal and access to
the people stands further expanded by the use of the words 'for matters connected therewith or
incidental thereto'.

Preamble is a relevant part of the Act, which can help in the process of interpretation. It, in fact,
is a kind of guide to the spirit of the statute. 1 The Preamble may not strictly be an instrument for
controlling or restricting the provisions of a statute but it certainly acts as a precept to gather the
legislative intention and how the object of the Act can be achieved. It is an instrument that helps
in giving a prudent legislative interpretation to a provision.

In the view of the above mentioned reasons, the present appeal in maintainable because it falls
under the jurisdiction of National Green Tribunal and it was held that the State should follow its
statutory obligations and there is a need to prevent degradation of the environment and ecology
of the Western Ghats under the precautionary principle.

***

BIBLIOGRAPHY

1 Justice G.P. Singh in "Principles of Statutory Interpretation", 13th ed. 2012.

 Cases Referred:
Dahanu Taluka Environment Protection Group & Anr. v. Bombay Suburban
Electricity Supply Co. Ltd. & Ors. (1991) 2 SCC 539,
Commissioner v. Griha Yajamanula Samkhya & Ors. (2001) 5 SCC 65,
V.K. Naswa Vs Union of India (2012) 2 SCC 542,
In Re Networking of Rivers. (2012) 4 SCC 51.
Vihsaka & Ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. 1997 (6) SCC 241 and Court On Its
Own Motion Vs. Union of India. 2012 (12) SCALE 307.

Websites:
Indian Kanoon (https://indiankanoon.org/doc/161378671/)
WWF India (http://www.wwfindia.org/?9722/Goa-Foundation-and-Ors-Vs)