Misplaced Pages

Rule of law: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 00:42, 29 May 2008 edit24.36.194.43 (talk)No edit summary← Previous edit Latest revision as of 19:59, 25 December 2024 edit undo176.222.8.92 (talk) Fixed copy-paste error.Tags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit 
Line 1: Line 1:
{{Short description|Political situation in which everyone is subject to the law}}
{{Redirect|Rule of Law}}
{{Distinguish|Rule according to higher law}}
] to reward the meritorious. ] surrounds her head and the ] of ] signifies the armor of righteousness and wisdom.<ref>Cole, John et al. (1997). '''', W. W. Norton & Company. p. 113</ref>]]
{{Politics}} {{Politics}}
{{Conflict resolution sidebar}}
The '''rule of law''' is a political and legal ] that all people and institutions within a country, state, or community are accountable to the same ]s, including lawmakers, government officials, and judges.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Sempill |first1=Julian |title=The Rule of Law and the Rule of Men: History, Legacy, Obscurity |journal=Hague Journal on the Rule of Law |date=2020 |volume=12 |issue=3 |pages=511–540 |doi=10.1007/s40803-020-00149-9|s2cid=256425870 }}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|date=15 March 2019|title=Rule of Law|url=https://www.nationalgeographic.org/encyclopedia/rule-law/|access-date=29 January 2022 |publisher=National Geographic Society|language=en}}</ref><ref>Hobson, Charles. ''The Great Chief Justice: John Marshall and the Rule of Law'', p. 57 (University Press of Kansas, 1996): according to ], "the framers of the Constitution contemplated that instrument as a rule for the government of courts, as well as of the legislature."</ref> It is sometimes stated simply as "no one is above the law" or "all are equal before the law". According to '']'', it is defined as "the mechanism, process, institution, practice, or norm that supports the equality of all citizens before the law, secures a nonarbitrary form of government, and more generally prevents the arbitrary use of power."<ref>{{Cite web |title=rule of law {{!}} Definition, Implications, Significance, & Facts {{!}} Britannica |url=https://www.britannica.com/topic/rule-of-law |access-date=29 January 2022 |website=] |language=en}}</ref>


Use of the phrase can be traced to ]. In the following century, Scottish theologian ] employed it in arguing against the ].<ref name="Rex"/> ] wrote that freedom in society means being subject only to laws written by a legislature that apply to everyone, with a person being otherwise free from both governmental and private restrictions of liberty. The phrase "rule of law" was further popularized in the 19th century by British jurist ]. However, the principle, if not the phrase itself, was recognized by ancient thinkers. ] wrote: "It is more proper that law should govern than any one of the citizens."
The '''rule of law''', in its most basic form, is the principle that no one is above the law. ] stated in his pamphlet '']'' (1776): "For as in absolute governments the king is law, so in free countries the law ought to be king; and there ought to be no other."


The term ''rule of law'' is closely related to ] as well as '']''. It refers to a political situation, not to any specific legal rule.<ref>{{Citation |last=Ten |first=C. l |title=Constitutionalism and the Rule of Law |date=2017 |work=A Companion to Contemporary Political Philosophy |pages=493–502 |publisher=John Wiley & Sons, Ltd |language=en |doi=10.1002/9781405177245.ch22 |isbn=978-1405177245}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal |last=Reynolds |first=Noel B. |date=1986 |title=Constitutionalism and the Rule of Law |url=https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2470&context=facpub |url-status=live |journal=All Faculty Publications (BYU ScholarsArchive) |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20191107015755/https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2470&context=facpub |archive-date=2019-11-07 |access-date=2020-02-21}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |title=Constitutionalism, Rule of Law, PS201H-2B3 |url=https://www.proconservative.net/CUNAPolSci201PartTwoB3.shtml |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180315220102/http://www.proconservative.net/CUNAPolSci201PartTwoB3.shtml |archive-date=15 March 2018 |access-date=12 November 2019 |website=www.proconservative.net}}</ref> Distinct is the ], where one person or group of persons rule arbitrarily.<ref> "I will say that we have "the rule of men" or "personal rule" when those who wield the power of the state are not obliged to give reasons to those over whom that power is being wielded—from the standpoint of the ruled, the rulers may simply act on their brute desires."</ref>
In ], the issuing of the ] was a prime example of the "rule of law." The Great Charter forced ] to submit to the law and succeeded in putting limits on ] fees and duties.


==History==
Perhaps the most important application of the rule of law is the principle that governmental authority is legitimately exercised only in accordance with written, publicly disclosed ]s adopted and enforced in accordance with established procedural steps that are referred to as ]. The principle is intended to be a safeguard against arbitrary governance, whether by a ] leader or by ]. Thus, the rule of law is hostile to ] and fundmental to ]. ] was one of the first modern authors to give the principle theoretical foundations, in '']'' (1644), and later ] in '']'' (1748).
Although credit for popularizing the expression "the rule of law" in modern times is usually given to ],<ref name="Wormuth">Wormuth, Francis. ''The Origins of Modern Constitutionalism'', p. 28 (1949).</ref><ref>]. ''The Rule of Law'', p. 3 (Penguin 2010).</ref> development of the legal concept can be traced through history to many ancient civilizations, including ], ], ], and ].<ref>Black, Anthony. ''A World History of Ancient Political Thought'' (Oxford University Press 2009). {{ISBN|0-19-928169-6}}{{page needed|date=March 2022}}</ref>


===Early history (to 15th century)===
In ] and legal thinking, the rule of law has frequently, but not always, been associated with a '']''. According to modern ]-] thinking, hallmarks of adherence to the rule of law commonly include a clear ], legal certainty, the principle of legitimate expectation and equality of all before the law.


The earliest conception of rule of law can be traced back to the Indian epics ] and ] - the earliest versions of which date around to 8th or 9th centuries BC.<ref>{{cite book |last1=Austin |first1=Christopher R. |title=Pradyumna: Lover, Magician, and Son of the Avatara |date=2019 |publisher=Oxford University Press |isbn=978-0-19-005411-3 |page=21 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=4jCoDwAAQBAJ&pg=PA21 |language=en |access-date=11 January 2020 |archive-date=7 September 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230907124231/https://books.google.com/books?id=4jCoDwAAQBAJ&pg=PA21 |url-status=live }}</ref><ref name="BrockingtonA">Brockington (1998, p. 26)</ref><ref>Buitenen (1973) pp. xxiv–xxv</ref> The ] deals with the concepts of ] (used to mean law and duty interchangeably), ] (duty of the king) and ] and states in one of its slokas that, "A King who after having sworn that he shall protect his subjects fails to protect them should be executed like a mad dog," and also that, "The people should execute a king who does not protect them, but deprives them of their property and assets and who takes no advice or guidance from any one. Such a king is not a king but misfortune."<ref>{{cite book |last1=Cowell |first1=Herbert |title=History and Constitution of the Courts and Legislative Authorities in India |date=1872 |publisher=University of Michigan Press |location=Michigan |isbn=1278155406 |pages=37–56}}</ref><ref>{{cite thesis |last=Giri |first=Ananta Kumar |date=5 November 2001 |title=Rule of Law and Indian Society: Colonial Encounters,post-colonial experiments and beyond |url=https://www.mids.ac.in/assets/doc/WP_165.pdf |degree=PhD |chapter=1 |publisher=Madras Institute of Development Studies |access-date=28 June 2024}}</ref>
The concept is not without controversy, and it has been said that "the phrase 'the Rule of Law' has become meaningless thanks to ideological abuse and general over-use".<ref>Judith N. Shklar (1987), "Political Theory and the Rule of Law", in Hutchinson and Monahan (eds.) ''The Rule of Law: Ideal or Ideology'' (Toronto: Carswell, 1987), p. 1. For a discussion of Shklar's view, see ] (2002), "Is the Rule of Law an Essentially Contested Concept? (in Florida)", in ''Law & Philosophy'', vol. 21/2, 2002. See also the entry on "]".</ref>


Other sources for the philosophy of rule of law can be traced to the ] which state that, "The law is the king of the kings. No one is higher than the law. Not even the king." Other commentaries include ]'s ] (4th-century BC), ] (dated to the 1st to 3rd century CE), ] (dated between the 3rd and 5th century CE), ] (dated between 15 CE and 16 CE).<ref>{{Cite web |title=The Indian Judicial System {{!}} A Historical Survey |url=https://www.allahabadhighcourt.in/event/TheIndianJudicialSystem_SSDhavan.html#:~:text=Rule%20of%20law%20in%20Ancient%20India&text=%22The%20people%20should%20execute%20a,not%20a%20king%20but%20misfortune.%22 |access-date=2023-02-08 |website=Allahabad High Court |language=en}}</ref><ref>{{cite thesis |last=Giri |first=Ananta Kumar |date=5 November 2001 |title=Rule of Law and Indian Society: Colonial Encounters,post-colonial experiments and beyond |url=https://www.mids.ac.in/assets/doc/WP_165.pdf |degree=PhD |chapter=1 |publisher=Madras Institute of Development Studies |access-date=28 June 2024}}</ref>
== Overview ==
The contrast between the ''rule of men'' and the ''rule of law'' is first found in ]'s ''Statesman'' and ''Laws'' and subsequently in ]'s ''Politics'', where the rule of law implies both obedience to positive law and formal checks and balances on rulers and magistrates.


==== Ancient Greece ====
In his treatise, Law of the Constitution (10th Ed., 1959), pp. 187, et seq., ] identified three principles which together establish the rule of law: (1) the absolute supremacy or predominance of regular law as opposed to the influence of arbitrary power; (2) equality before the law or the equal subjection of all classes to the ordinary law of the land administered by the ordinary courts; and (3) the law of the constitution is a consequence of the rights of individuals as defined and enforced by the courts."
Several scholars have also traced the concept of the rule of law back to 4th-century BC ], seeing it either as the dominant value of the ],<ref>{{cite book |last1=Ostwald |first1=Martin |title=From popular sovereignty to the sovereignty of law : law, society, and politics in fifth-century Athens |date=1986 |publisher=University of California Press |location=Berkeley |isbn=9780520067981 |pages=412–496}}</ref> or as one held in conjunction with the concept of ].<ref>{{cite book |last1=Ober |first1=Josiah |title=Mass and elite in democratic Athens : rhetoric, ideology, and the power of the people |date=1989 |publisher=Princeton University Press |location=Princeton, N.J. |isbn=9780691028644 |pages=144–7, 299–300}}</ref> However, these arguments have been challenged and the present consensus is that upholding an abstract concept of the rule of law was not "the predominant consideration" of the Athenian legal system.<ref>{{cite book |last1=Liddel |first1=Peter P. |title=Civic obligation and individual liberty in ancient Athens |date=2007 |publisher=Oxford University Press |location=Oxford |isbn=978-0-19-922658-0 |pages=130–131}}</ref> ], in his ], wrote: "It is more proper that law should govern than any one of the citizens: upon the same principle, if it is advantageous to place the supreme power in some particular persons, they should be appointed to be only guardians, and the servants of the laws."<ref name="ari">Aristotle, '']'' ]</ref>


The idea of the rule of law can be regarded as a modern iteration of the ideas of ancient Greek philosophers, who argued that the best form of government was rule by the best men.<ref name="Clarke">David Clarke, " {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160408221346/http://www.lfip.org/lawe506/documents/lawe506davidclarke.pdf|date=2016-04-08}}" in Kanishka Jayasuriya, ed., ''Law, Capitalism and Power in Asia'' (New York: Routledge, 1998).</ref> ] advocated a ] ruled by an idealized ], who was above the law.<ref name="Clarke" /> Plato nevertheless hoped that the best men would be good at respecting established laws, explaining that "Where the law is subject to some other authority and has none of its own, the collapse of the state, in my view, is not far off; but if law is the master of the government and the government is its slave, then the situation is full of promise and men enjoy all the blessings that the gods shower on a state."<ref>Cooper, John et al. '']'', p. 1402 (Hackett Publishing, 1997).</ref> In contrast, ] flatly opposed letting the highest officials wield power beyond guarding and serving the laws.<ref name="Clarke" /> In other words, Aristotle advocated the rule of law:
:: — ''Halsbury's Laws of England'', Vol: Constitutional Law and Human Rights, paragraph 6, footnote 1


<blockquote>It is more proper that law should govern than any one of the citizens: upon the same principle, if it is advantageous to place the supreme power in some particular persons, they should be appointed to be only guardians, and the servants of the laws.<ref name="ari" /></blockquote>
:''... every official, from the Prime Minister down to a constable or a collector of taxes, is under the same responsibility for every act done without legal justification as any other citizen. The Reports abound with cases in which officials have been brought before the courts, and made, in their personal capacity, liable to punishment, or to the payment of damages, for acts done in their official character but in excess of their lawful authority. ... and all subordinates, though carrying out the commands of their official superiors, are as responsible for any act which the law does not authorise as is any private and unofficial person.''


The Roman statesman ] is often cited as saying, roughly: "We are all servants of the laws in order to be free."<ref>In full: "The magistrates who administer the law, the judges who act as its spokesmen, all the rest of us who live as its servants, grant it our allegiance as a guarantee of our freedom."{{mdash}}{{cite book |author=Cicero |title=Murder Trials |publisher=Penguin |year=1975 |series=Penguin Classics |location=Harmondsworth |page=217 |translator=Michael Grant}}
:: — ''Law of the Constitution'' (London: MacMillan, 9th ed., 1950), 194.
Original Latin: "Legum ministri magistratus, legum interpretes iudices, legum denique idcirco omnes servi sumus ut liberi esse possimus."{{mdash}}{{cite web |title=Pro Cluentio |url=https://www.thelatinlibrary.com/cicero/cluentio.shtml#cfivethree |access-date=5 March 2018 |website=The Latin Library |at=53:146}}</ref> During the Roman Republic, controversial magistrates might be put on trial when their terms of office expired. Under the Roman Empire, the sovereign was personally immune (''legibus solutus''), but those with grievances could sue the treasury.<ref name="Wormuth" />


==== China ====
Another definition can be found at ''Halsbury's Laws of England'', Vol: Constitutional Law and Human Rights, paragraph 6
In China, members of the school of ] during the 3rd century BC argued for using law as a tool of governance, but they promoted "rule ''by'' law" as opposed to "rule ''of'' law," meaning that they placed the aristocrats and emperor above the law.<ref>Xiangming, Zhang. {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170617040252/https://www.international-relations.com/wbcm5-1/wbrule.htm|date=17 June 2017}}, ''The Culture Mandala: Bulletin of the Centre for East-West Cultural and Economic Studies'' (2002): "Although Han Fei recommended that the government should rule by law, which seems impartial, he advocated that the law be enacted by the lords solely. The lords place themselves above the law. The law is thereby a monarchical means to control the people, not the people's means to restrain the lords. The lords are by no means on an equal footing with the people. Hence we cannot mention the rule by law proposed by Han Fei in the same breath as democracy and the rule of law advocated today."<br />Bevir, Mark. '''', pp. 161–162.<br />Munro, Donald. '']''. p. 4.<br />Guo, Xuezhi. ''''. p. 152.</ref> In contrast, the ] school of ] rejected ] in favor of a ] that even the ruler would be subject to.<ref>{{cite book |last=Peerenboom |first=Randall |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=qxgLcrLL-IIC |title=Law and morality in ancient China: the silk manuscripts of Huang-Lao |publisher=SUNY Press |year=1993 |isbn=978-0-7914-1237-4 |page=171}}</ref>


The ancient concept of rule ''of'' law can be distinguished from rule ''by'' law, according to political science professor Li Shuguang: "The difference&nbsp;... is that, under the rule of law, the law is preeminent and can serve as a check against the abuse of power. Under rule by law, the law is a mere tool for a government, that suppresses in a legalistic fashion."<ref>Tamanaha, Brian (2004). ''''. Cambridge University Press. p. 3</ref>
:''The legal basis of government gives rise to the principle of legality, sometimes referred to as the rule of law. This may be expressed as a number of propositions, as described below.


==== England ====
:''(1) The existence or non-existence of a power or duty is a matter of law and not of fact, and so must be determined by reference either to the nature of the legal personality of the body in question and the capacities that go with it, or to some enactment or reported case. As far as the capacities that go with legal personality are concerned, many public bodies are incorporated by statute and so statutory provisions will define and limit their legal capacities. Individuals who are public office-holders have the capacities that go with the legal personality that they have as natural persons. The Crown is a corporation sole or aggregate and so has general legal capacity, including (subject to some statutory limitations and limitations imposed by European law) the capacity to enter into contracts and to own and dispose of property. The fact of a continued undisputed exercise of a power by a public body is immaterial, unless it points to a customary power exercised from time immemorial. In particular, the existence of a power cannot be proved by the practice of a private office.
], Anglo-Saxon king in the 9th century, reformed the law of his kingdom and assembled a law code (the ]) which he grounded on biblical commandments. He held that the same law had to be applied to all persons, whether rich or poor, friends or enemies. This was likely inspired by ] 19:15: "You shall do no iniquity in judgment. You shall not favor the wretched and you shall not defer to the rich. In righteousness you are to judge your fellow."<ref>{{cite book|last1=Alter|first1=Robert|title=The Five Books of Moses: A Translation with Commentary|date=2004|publisher=W.W. Norton & Company|isbn=978-0-393-01955-1|page=|url-access=registration|url=https://archive.org/details/fivebooksofmoses00alte/page/627}}</ref>{{better source needed|date=November 2022}}


In 1215, Archbishop ] gathered the Barons in England and restricted the powers of ] and future sovereigns and magistrates under the rule of law, preserving ancient liberties by ] in return for exacting taxes.<ref></ref><ref> {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20161007172827/http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/featured_documents/magna_carta/ |date=2016-10-07 }}.</ref> The influence of Magna Carta ebbed and waned across centuries. The weakening of royal power it demonstrated was based more upon the instability presented by contested claims than thoughtful adherence to constitutional principles. Until 1534, the Church excommunicated people for violations, but after a time Magna Carta was simply replaced by other statutes considered binding upon the king to act according to "process of the law". Magna Carta's influence is considered greatly diminished by the reign of ], after the ].<ref>{{cite book|last1=Turner|first1=Ralph|title=Magna Carta|date=2016|publisher=Routledge}}</ref> The ideas contained in Magna Carta are widely considered to have influenced the ].
:''(2) The argument of state necessity is not sufficient to establish the existence of a power or duty which would entitle a public body to act in a way that interferes with the rights or liberties of individuals. However, the common law does recognise that in case of extreme urgency, when the ordinary machinery of the state cannot function, there is a justification for the doing of acts needed to restore the regular functioning of the machinery of government.


The first known use of this English phrase occurred around 1500.<ref>''Oxford English Dictionary'' (OED), "", accessed 27 April 2013. According to the OED, this sentence from about 1500 was written by ]: "Lawes And constitutcions be ordeyned be cause the noysome Appetit of man maye be kepte vnder the Rewle of lawe by the wiche mankinde ys dewly enformed to lyue honestly." And this sentence from 1559 is attributed to ]: "A Magistrate should..kepe rekenyng of all mennes behauiours, and to be carefull, least thei despisyng the rule of lawe, growe to a wilfulnes."</ref> Another early example of the phrase "rule of law" is found in a petition to ] in 1610, from the ]:
:''(3) If effect is to be given to the doctrine that the existence or non-existence of a power or duty is a matter of law, it should be possible for the courts to determine whether or not a particular power or duty exists, to define its ambit and provide an effective remedy for unlawful action. The independence of the judiciary is essential to the principle of legality. The right of access to the courts can be excluded by statute, but this is not often done in express terms. A person whose civil or political rights and freedoms as guaranteed by the ] (the European Convention on Human Rights) have been infringed is entitled under the Convention to an effective right of access to the courts and an effective national remedy. On the other hand, powers are often given to bodies other than the ordinary courts, to decide questions of law without appeal to the ordinary courts, and sometimes in such terms that their freedom from appellate jurisdiction extends to their findings of fact or law on which the existence of their powers depends.
<blockquote>Amongst many other points of happiness and freedom which your majesty's subjects of this kingdom have enjoyed under your royal progenitors, kings and queens of this realm, there is none which they have accounted more dear and precious than this, to be guided and governed by the certain ''rule of the law'' which giveth both to the head and members that which of right belongeth to them, and not by any uncertain or arbitrary form of government&nbsp;...<ref>]. ''The Constitutional History of England'', vol. 1, p. 441 (1827).</ref></blockquote>


=== Modern period (1500 CE – present) ===
:''(4) Since the principal elements of the structure of the machinery of government, and the powers and duties which belong to its several parts, are defined by law, its form and course can be altered only by a change of law. Conversely, since the legislative power of ] is unrestricted, save where European Community law has primacy, its form and course can at any time be altered by Parliament. Consequently there are no powers or duties inseparably annexed to the executive government.
{{See also|Rechtsstaat}}
{{Republicanism sidebar}}


In 1481, during the reign of ], the '']'' was approved by the ], establishing the submission of royal power (included its officers) to the laws of the ].<ref>Ferro, Víctor: El Dret Públic Català. ''Les Institucions a Catalunya fins al Decret de Nova Planta''; Eumo Editorial; {{ISBN|84-7602-203-4}}{{page needed|date=March 2022}}</ref>
] Index, which measures the extent to which agents have confidence in and abide by the rules of society. Colors range from green (top quartile), to yellow (middle high), orange (middle low) and red (bottom quartile).]]


In 1607, English Chief Justice ] said in the '']'' "that the law was the golden met-wand and measure to try the causes of the subjects; and which protected His Majesty in safety and peace: with which the King was greatly offended, and said, that then he should be under the law, which was treason to affirm, as he said; to which I said, that Bracton saith, ''quod Rex non debet esse sub homine, sed sub Deo et lege'' (That the King ought not to be under any man but under God and the law.)."
In ], the most famous exposition of the same principle was drafted by ] for the constitution of the Commonwealth of ], in justification of the principle of separation of powers:


Among the first modern authors to use the term and give the principle theoretical foundations was ] in '']'' (1644).<ref name=Rex>Rutherford, Samuel. ''Lex, rex: the law and the prince, a dispute for the just prerogative of king and people, containing the reasons and causes of the defensive wars of the kingdom of Scotland, and of their expedition for the ayd and help of their brethren of England'', (1644): "The prince remaineth, even being a prince, a social creature, a man, as well as a king; one who must buy, sell, promise, contract, dispose: ergo, he is not regula regulans, but under rule of law&nbsp;..."</ref> The title, Latin for "the law is king", subverts the traditional formulation ''rex lex'' ("the king is law").<ref name=TSC-RoL-brief>{{cite web|title=The Rule of Law|url=https://www.consoc.org.uk/other-content/about-us/discover-the-facts/the-rule-of-law/|publisher=The Constitution Society|access-date=3 October 2014|url-status=dead|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20141006092303/https://www.consoc.org.uk/other-content/about-us/discover-the-facts/the-rule-of-law/|archive-date=6 October 2014}}</ref> ] wrote in ''Oceana'' (1656), drawing principally on Aristotle's ''Politics'', that among forms of government an "Empire of Laws, and not of Men" was preferable to an "Empire of Men, and not of Laws".<ref>{{cite book|url=https://archive.org/details/oceanaotherworks00harr|last=Harrington|first=James|title=The Oceana and other works|editor-last=Toland|editor-first=John|location=London|publisher=Millar|edition=3|year=1747|page=37 (Internet Archive: copy possessed by ])}}</ref>
:''In the government of this commonwealth, the legislative department shall never exercise the executive and judicial powers or either of them: the executive shall never exercise the legislative and judicial powers, or either of them: the judicial shall never exercise the legislative and executive powers, or either of them: to the end it may be a government of laws and not of men.''


] also discussed this issue in his '']'' (1690):
:: — '']'', Part The First, art. XXX (1780).
<blockquote>The natural liberty of man is to be free from any superior power on earth, and not to be under the will or legislative authority of man, but to have only the law of nature for his rule. The liberty of man, in society, is to be under no other legislative power, but that established, by consent, in the commonwealth; nor under the dominion of any will, or restraint of any law, but what that legislative shall enact, according to the trust put in it. Freedom then is not what Sir Robert Filmer tells us, Observations, A. 55. a liberty for every one to do what he lists, to live as he pleases, and not to be tied by any laws: but freedom of men under government is, to have a standing rule to live by, common to every one of that society, and made by the legislative power erected in it; a liberty to follow my own will in all things, where the rule prescribes not; and not to be subject to the inconstant, uncertain, unknown, arbitrary will of another man: as freedom of nature is, to be under no other restraint but the law of nature.<ref>Locke, John. ], Ch. IV, sec. 22 (1690).</ref></blockquote>


The principle was also discussed by ] in '']'' (1748).<ref name="Tamanaha3">Tamanaha, Brian. '''', p. 47 (Cambridge University Press, 2004).</ref> The phrase "rule of law" appears in ]'s ''Dictionary'' (1755).<ref>Peacock, Anthony Arthur, '''', p. 24. 2010.</ref>
The last phrase, "to the end it may be a government of laws and not of men," has been quoted with approval by the ] and every ] in the ].


In 1776, the notion that no one is above the law was popular during the founding of the United States. For example, ] wrote in his pamphlet '']'' that "in America, ''the law is king''. For as in absolute governments the King is law, so in free countries the law ''ought'' to be king; and there ought to be no other."<ref>Lieberman, Jethro. '''', p. 436 (University of California Press 2005).</ref> In 1780, ] enshrined this principle in Article VI of the Declaration of Rights in the ]:<blockquote>No man, nor corporation, or association of men, have any other title to obtain advantages, or particular and exclusive privileges, distinct from those of the community, than what arises from the consideration of services rendered to the public; and this title being in nature neither hereditary, nor transmissible to children, or descendants, or relations by blood, the idea of a man born a magistrate, lawgiver, or judge, is absurd and unnatural.<ref>'']'', Part the First, Art. VI.</ref>
A similar concept is found in ] by ]:
</blockquote>


The term "rule of law" was popularised by British jurist ],<ref name="Wormuth" /> who viewed the rule of law in common law systems as comprising three principles. First, that government must follow the law that it makes; second, that no one is exempt from the operation of the law and that it applies equally to all; and third, that general rights emerge from particular cases decided by the courts.<ref>Albert Venn Dicey, Introduction to the Study of the Law of the Constitution, 5th ed (London: Macmillan and Co, 1897) at 175-84, cited in , Centre for Constitutional Studies, July 4, 2019</ref>
:'' . . . the world may know, that so far as we approve of ], that in America THE LAW IS KING. For as in absolute governments the King is law, so in free countries the law OUGHT to be King; and there ought to be no other.''


The influence of Britain, France and the United States contributed to spreading the principle of the rule of law to other countries around the world.<ref>{{cite book|last1=Winks|first1=Robin W.|title=World civilization: a brief history|date=1993|publisher=Collegiate Press|location=San Diego, CA|isbn=978-0-939693-28-3|page=406|edition=2nd|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=mY7McxJl7jYC&pg=PA406}}</ref><ref>{{cite book |last1=Billias |first1=George Athan |title=American constitutionalism heard round the world, 1776–1989: a global perspective |date=2011 |publisher=New York University Press |location=New York |isbn=978-0-8147-2517-7 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=ku0TCgAAQBAJ&pg=PA54 |pages=53–56}}</ref>
The concept "rule of law" is generally associated with several other concepts, such as:
* '']'' — No ]s
* '']'' — All individuals are "presumed innocent until proven otherwise"
* '']'' — All individuals are given the same rights without distinction to their social stature, religion, political opinions, etc. That is, as ] would have it, "law should be like death, which spares no one."
* '']'' — in full ''habeas corpus ad subjiciendum'', a ] term meaning "you must have the body to be subjected (to examination)". A person who is arrested has the right to be told what crimes he or she is accused of, and to request that his or her custody be reviewed by judicial authority. Persons unlawfully imprisoned have to be freed.


== Legal theory and philosophy ==
The concept of "rule of law" per se says nothing of the "justness" of the laws themselves, but simply how the legal system upholds the law. As a consequence of this, a very undemocratic nation or one without respect for ] can exist with or without a "rule of law", a situation which many argue is applicable to several modern ]s. However, the "rule of law" or '']'' is considered a prerequisite for ], and as such, has served as a common basis for ]s discourse between countries such as the ] and the West.<ref> As regards the rule of law in China, see , Legal Issues of Economic Integration, Kluwer Law International, Volume 33, Number 3, pp. 267–270, 2006. by </ref>
The ''Oxford English Dictionary'' has defined ''rule of law'' as:<ref name="OED">''Oxford English Dictionary'' online (accessed 13 September 2018; spelling Americanized). The phrase "the rule of law" is also sometimes used in other senses. ''See'' Garner, Bryan A. (Editor in Chief). ''Black's Law Dictionary'', 9th Edition, p. 1448. (Thomson Reuters, 2009). {{ISBN|978-0-314-26578-4}}. Black's provides five definitions of "rule of law": the lead definition is "A substantive legal principle"; the second is the "supremacy of regular as opposed to arbitrary power".</ref>


<blockquote>The authority and influence of law in society, esp. when viewed as a constraint on individual and institutional behaviour; (hence) the principle whereby all members of a society (including those in government) are considered equally subject to publicly disclosed legal codes and processes.</blockquote>
The rule of law is an ancient ideal first posited by Plato as grounded in divine reason and so inherent in the ]. It continues to be important as a normative ideal, even as legal scholars struggle to define it. The concept of impartial rule of law is found in the Chinese political philosophy of ], but the totalitarian nature of the regime that this produced had a profound effect on ] political thought which at least rhetorically emphasized personal moral relations over impersonal legal ones. Although ] were not subject to law, in practice they found it necessary to act according to regular procedures for reasons of statecraft.


Despite wide use by politicians, judges and academics, the rule of law has been described as "an exceedingly elusive notion".<ref name="elusive">{{cite book|last=Tamanaha|first=Brian Z.|title=On the Rule of Law|publisher=]|year=2004|page=3}}</ref> In modern ], there are at least two principal conceptions of the rule of law: a ] or "thin" definition, and a substantive or "]" definition. Formalist definitions of the rule of law do not make a judgment about the justness of law itself, but define specific procedural attributes that a legal framework must have in order to be in compliance with the rule of law. Substantive conceptions of the rule of law go beyond this and include certain substantive rights that are said to be based on, or derived from, the rule of law.<ref name="Craig">{{cite journal|last=Craig|first=Paul P.|title=Formal and Substantive Conceptions of the Rule of Law: An Analytical Framework|journal=Public Law|page=467|year=1997}}</ref> One occasionally encounters a third "functional" conception.<ref name="Tamanaha">Tamanaha, Brian. , ''Current Legal Problems'', vol. 55, via ] (2002).</ref>
In the ] legal tradition rule of law has been seen as a guard against ] and as enforcing limitations on the power of the government. In China, the discourse around rule of law centers on the notion that laws ultimately enhance the power of the state and the nation, which is why the ] adopts the principle of rule ''by'' law rather than rule ''of'' law.


The functional interpretation of the term rule of law contrasts the rule of law with the ].<ref name="Stephenson">Stephenson, Matthew. , World Bank Research (2008).</ref> According to the functional view, a society in which government officers have a great deal of discretion has a low degree of "rule of law", whereas a society in which government officers have little discretion has a high degree of "rule of law".<ref name="Stephenson" /> Upholding the rule of law can sometimes require the punishment of those who commit offenses that are ] under ] but not statutory law.<ref>{{cite journal|title=Justifiably Punishing the Justified|author=Heidi M. Hurd|journal=Michigan Law Review|volume=90|date=Aug 1992|pages=2203–2324|jstor=1289573|issue=8|doi=10.2307/1289573|author-link=Heidi M. Hurd|url=https://repository.law.umich.edu/mlr/vol90/iss8/2}}</ref> The rule of law is thus somewhat at odds with flexibility, even when flexibility may be preferable.<ref name="Stephenson" />
More recently, the rule of law has been considered as one of the key dimensions that determines the quality and ] of a country.<ref></ref> Research, like the ], defines the rule of law as: ''"the extent to which agents have confidence and abide by the rules of society, and in particular the quality of contract enforcement, the police and the courts, as well as the likelihood of crime or violence."''<ref>.</ref> Based on this definition the Worldwide Governance Indicators project has developed aggregate measurements for the rule of law in more than 200 countries.


== Declaration of Delhi== === Formalist conception ===
Formalist theorists claim that the rule of law requires procedural generality (general rules that apply to classes of persons and behaviors as opposed to individuals), publicity (no secret laws), prospective application (little or no retroactive laws), consistency (no contradictory laws),<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Donelson |first1=Raff |date=2019 |title=Legal Inconsistencies |journal=Tulsa Law Review |volume=55 |issue=1 |pages=15–44 |ssrn=3365259}}</ref> equality (applied equally throughout all society), and certainty (certainty of application for a given situation), but that there are no requirements with regard to the substantive content of the law.<ref name="Tamanaha" /><ref>{{citation |author=Ronald M. Dworkin |title=A Matter of Principle |page=11 |year=1985 |location=Cambridge, Mass. |publisher=] |isbn=978-0-674-55461-0 |author-link=Ronald Dworkin}}.</ref> Formalists include ], ], ], and ].] is often associated with the thin conception of the ]]]According to Dicey, the rule of law in the United Kingdom has three dominant characteristics:<ref>{{citation |author=A V Dicey |title=An Introduction to the Study of the Law of the Constitution |pages=179–201 at 198–199 |year=1927 |chapter=The Rule of Law: Its Nature and General Applications |chapter-url=https://archive.org/stream/cu31924030503720#page/n309/mode/1up |edition=8th |location=London |publisher=] |oclc=5755153 |author-link=A. V. Dicey |orig-year=1915}}; see also {{citation |author=A V Dicey |title=An Introduction to the Study of the Law of the Constitution |page=202 |year=1959 |edition=10th |location=London |publisher=Macmillan & Co. |isbn=978-1-4212-9044-7}}.</ref> First, the absolute supremacy of regular law – a person is to be judged by a fixed set of rules and punished for breaching only the law, and is not to be subject to "the exercise by persons in authority of wide, arbitrary, or discretionary powers of constraint".<ref>Dicey (8th ed.), pp. 183–184.</ref> Second, the equality of law — "the universal subjection of all classes to one law administered by the ordinary Courts".<ref>See also Dicey (8th ed.), p. 189.</ref> Third, the fact that, in the United Kingdom, the ] is the result of the ], being not the source but the consequence of citizens' rights.<ref>See also Dicey (8th ed.), p. 191.</ref>
{{mainarticle|Declaration of Delhi}}
In 1959, an international gathering of over 185 judges, lawyers, and law professors from 53 countries, meeting in ] and speaking as the ], made a declaration as to the fundamental principle of the rule of law.


A 1977 article by ] argued that the rule of law means that people should obey the law and be ruled by it.<ref name="Raz">{{citation |author=Joseph Raz |title=The Rule of Law and Its Virtue |journal=] |volume=93 |pages=195–211 at 196 and 198 |year=1977 |author-link=Joseph Raz}}.</ref> Construed more narrowly, the rule of law would also mean that the government should be ruled by and subjected to the law. Following from Raz's general conception of the rule of law, he argued for the existence of two groups of principles of the rule of law: First, that the law is capable of guiding the behaviour of its subjects; second, that there exists an effective legal machinery that secures actual compliance with the rule of law.<ref>Raz, p. 202.</ref> The first group comprises principles such as the accessibility, clarity, and prospective nature of the law;<ref>Raz, pp. 198–199.</ref> the stability of the law;<ref>Raz, p. 199.</ref> and the compliance of lawmaking with "open, stable, clear and general rules" that create a stable framework,<ref name=":02">Raz, pp. 199–200.</ref> with such rules empowering authorities to make orders and providing guidelines for the exercise of such powers.<ref name=":02" /> The second group includes principles including ],<ref name="Raz 200">Raz, pp. 200–201.</ref> ],<ref name="Raz 201">Raz, p. 201.</ref> ],<ref name="Raz 201" /> and limited administrative discretion.<ref>Raz, pp. 201–202.</ref>
== Lord Bingham's sub-rules ==
] in February 2009. He stated in a 1977 article that the rule of law requires that "the making of particular laws should be guided by open and relatively stable general rules"]]
In Raz's view, one of the virtues of the rule of law is the restraint it imposes on authorities. It aims to exclude arbitrary power, as most of the exercises of arbitrary power violate the rule of law. Arbitrary power is excluded when courts hold themselves accountable only to the law and observe "fairly strict procedures". Another virtue is the protection it accords to individual freedom, namely, "the sense of freedom in which it is identified with an effective ability to choose between as many options as possible". Most importantly, to adhere to the rule of law is to respect human ] by "treating humans as persons capable of planning and plotting their future".<ref>Raz, pp. 202–204.</ref>


Raz also identified some of the potential pitfalls of the rule of law. He opined that as the rule of law is designed "to minimise the harm to freedom and dignity which the law may cause in its pursuit of its goals however laudable these may be", the strict pursuit of the rule of law may prevent one from achieving certain social goals which may be preferable to the rule of law: "Sacrificing too many social goals on the altar of the rule of law may make the law barren and empty".<ref>Raz, p. 211.</ref>
In his speech on ], ] for the Sir David Williams Lecture in the Law Faculty of Cambridge University <ref></ref>, ] postulated eight sub-rules of the rule of law. It should be noted that Bingham takes a strongly substantive view on the rule of law, and that these sub-rules would be subject to fierce criticism by journalists.


=== Substantive conception ===
* the law must be accessible and so far as possible intelligible, clear and predictable
Substantive theorists believe that the rule of law necessarily entails protection of individual rights. Some substantive theorists believe that democracy is part of the rule of law.<ref name="Stephenson" /> Substantivists include ], ], ], and ], holding that the rule of law intrinsically protects some or all individual rights.] in September 2008. Dworkin's conception of the rule of law is "thick", as it encompasses a substantive theory of law and ].]]
* questions of legal right and liability should ordinarily be resolved by application of the law and not the exercise of discretion
Ronald Dworkin defines what he terms the "rights conception" of the rule of law as follows:<ref name="Dworkin 11">Dworkin, pp. 11–12.</ref>
* the laws of the land should apply equally to all, save to the extent that objective differences justify differentiation
{{blockquote|It assumes that citizens have moral rights and duties with respect to one another, and political rights against the state as a whole. It insists that these moral and political rights be recognized in positive law, so that they may be enforced upon the demand of individual citizens through courts or other judicial institutions of the familiar type, so far as this is practicable. The rule of law on this conception is the ideal of rule by an accurate public conception of individual rights. It does not distinguish, as the rule book conception does, between the rule of law and substantive justice; on the contrary it requires, as part of the ideal of law, that the rules in the book capture and enforce moral rights.}}
* the law must afford adequate protection of fundamental human rights
], in analysing Dworkin's view, drew three conclusions. First, Dworkin rejects the need to distinguish between "legal" rules and a more complete ], since the rule of law is basically the theory of law and ] that he believes is correct. Secondly, the rule of law is not simply the thin or formal rule of law; the latter forms part of Dworkin's theory of law and adjudication. Thirdly, since taking a substantive view of the rule of law requires choosing what the best theory of ] is, it is necessary to articulate particular conceptions of what liberty, equality and other freedoms require.<ref>{{citation |author=Paul Craig |title=Formal and Substantive Conceptions of the Rule of Law: An Analytical Framework |journal=] |pages=467–487 at 478 |year=1997 |author-link=Paul Craig (law professor)}}.</ref>
* means must be provided for resolving, without prohibitive cost or inordinate delay, bona fide civil disputes which the parties themselves are unable to resolve
* ministers and public officers at all levels must exercise the powers conferred on them reasonably, in good faith, for the purpose for which the powers were conferred and without exceeding the limits of such powers
* adjudicative procedures provided by the state should be fair
* the state must comply with its obligations in international law, the law which, whether deriving from treaty or international custom and practice, governs the conduct of nations.


== Authoritarianism == == Social science analyses ==


=== Economics ===
Rule of law is frequently opposed by authoritarian and totalitarian states. The explicit policy of such governments, as evidenced in the ]s of ], is that the government possesses the inherent authority to act purely on its own volition and without being subject to any checks or limitations. Dictatorships generally establish ] forces, which are not accountable to established laws, which can suppress threats to state authority.
Economists and lawyers have studied and analysed the rule of law's impact on ]. In particular, a major question in the area of ] is whether the rule of law matters to economic development, particularly in ].<ref>Luis Flores Ballesteros. "Corruption and development. Does the 'rule of law' factor weigh more than we think?" 54 Pesos May. 2008:54 Pesos 15 November 2008. </ref> The economist ] analyzed how the rule of law might be beneficial to the free market. Hayek proposed that under the rule of law, individuals would be able to make wise investments and future plans with some confidence in a successful return on investment when he stated: "under the Rule of Law the government is prevented from stultifying individual efforts by ''ad hoc'' action. Within the known rules of the game the individual is free to pursue his personal ends and desires, certain that the powers of government will not be used deliberately to frustrate his efforts."<ref name="Serfdom">{{cite book |last=Hayek |first=F.A. |title=The Road to Serfdom |publisher=The University of Chicago Press |year=1994 |isbn=978-0-226-32061-8 |location=Chicago |page=81}}</ref>


Studies have shown that weak rule of law (for example, discretionary regulatory enforcement) discourages investment. Economists have found, for example, that a rise in discretionary regulatory enforcement caused US firms to abandon international investments.<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Graham |first1=Brad |last2=Stroup |first2=Caleb |year=2016 |title=Does Anti-bribery enforcement deter foreign investment? |url=https://fcpa.stanford.edu/academic-articles/20150511-does-anti-bribery-enforcement-deter-foreign-investment.pdf |journal=Applied Economics Letters |volume=23 |pages=63–67 |doi=10.1080/13504851.2015.1049333 |s2cid=218640318 |via=Taylor and Francis}}</ref>
== Critique ==
{{Refimprove|date=March 2007}}
] asserts the ] ] is an instrument of oppression of the ] at the hands of the ], which set the laws to suit itself. Following this, some ]s analyze the "rule of law" as a judicial fiction which aims at disguising the reality of violence and, in Marxist terminology, "]". This theory presumes that the "bourgeoisie" holds the power to set the laws.


] is the study of the compatibility of economic and financial decisions within existing constitutional law frameworks. Aspects of constitutional frameworks relevant to both the rule of law and ] include government spending on the ], which, in many transitional and ], is completely controlled by the executive. Additionally, judicial corruption may arise from both the executive branch and private actors. Standards of ] such as transparency can also be used during annual ] for the benefit of the rule of law. Further, the availability of an effective court system in situations of unfair government spending and executive impoundment of previously authorized appropriations is a key element for the success of the rule of law.<ref>Peter Barenboim, "Defining the rules", ''The European Lawyer'', Issue 90, October 2009</ref>
The ] philosopher ] argues that the ] is at the core of the concept of ], and not the "rule of law" as ] thinkers have it. While the sovereign claims to follow the "rule of law", any protection the people have, however fundamental, can be jettisoned once the government finds it convenient to do so.


=== Comparative approaches ===
Those that take formal conceptions of the rule of law have criticised more substansive conceptions which question whether a law is "good or bad".<ref>Joseph Raz: The Rule of Law and It's Virtue (1977)</ref>
The term "rule of law" has been used primarily in the English-speaking countries, and it is not yet fully clarified with regard to such well-established democracies such as Sweden, Denmark, France, Germany, or Japan. A common language between lawyers of common law and civil law countries is critically important for research of links between the rule of law and real economy.<ref>Peter Barenboim, Natalya Merkulova. {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210224055639/http://philosophicalclub.ru/content/docs/worldruleoflaw.pdf|date=2021-02-24}}, edited by Francis Neate and Holly Nielsen, Justitsinform, Moscow (2007).</ref>


The rule of law can be hampered when there is a disconnect between legal and popular consensus. For example, under the auspices of the ], nominally strong copyright laws have been implemented throughout most of the world; but because the attitude of much of the population does not conform to these laws, a rebellion against ownership rights has manifested in rampant ], including an increase in ].<ref>{{citation |author=Bica-Huiu, Alina |title=White Paper: Building a Culture of Respect for the Rule of Law |publisher=American Bar Association}}</ref> Similarly, in Russia, ] is common and a person who admits he does not pay taxes is not judged or criticized by his colleagues and friends, because the tax system is viewed as unreasonable.<ref>{{cite web |author=Pope, Ronald R. |title=The Rule of Law and Russian Culture – Are They Compatible? |url=https://www2.gwu.edu/~ieresgwu/assets/docs/demokratizatsiya%20archive/07-02_pope.pdf |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160902182129/https://www.gwu.edu/~ieresgwu/assets/docs/demokratizatsiya%20archive/07-02_pope.pdf |archive-date=2 September 2016 |access-date=15 April 2017}}</ref> ] likewise has different normative implications across cultures.<ref name="licht">{{cite journal |author=Licht, Amir N. |date=December 2007 |title=Culture rules: The foundations of the rule of law and other norms of governance |url=https://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/39991/3/wp605.pdf |journal=Journal of Comparative Economics |volume=35 |issue=4 |pages=659–688 |doi=10.1016/j.jce.2007.09.001 |hdl-access=free |hdl=2027.42/39991}}</ref>
==References and notes==

{{reflist}}
=== Education ===
UNESCO has argued that ] has an important role in promoting the rule of law and a ] of lawfulness, providing an important protective function by strengthening learners' abilities to face and overcome difficult life situations. Young people can be important contributors to a culture of lawfulness, and governments can provide educational support that nurtures positive values and attitudes in future generations.<ref name=":0">{{Cite web |last=UNESCO and UNODC |date=2019 |title=Strengthening the rule of lawthrough education: A guide for policymakers |url=https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000366771 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200225195201/https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000366771 |archive-date=2020-02-25 |access-date=2019-05-22}}</ref> A movement towards education for justice seeks to promote the rule of law in schools.<ref name=":0" />

==Status in various jurisdictions==
] report]]

The rule of law has been considered one of the key dimensions that determine the quality and ] of a country.<ref name="Bank">Kaufman, Daniel et al. (July 2007).</ref> Research, like the ], defines the rule of law as "the extent to which agents have confidence and abide by the rules of society, and in particular the quality of contract enforcement, the police and the courts, as well as the likelihood of crime or violence."<ref name="Bank" /> Based on this definition the Worldwide Governance Indicators project has developed aggregate measurements for the rule of law in more than 200 countries, as seen in the map at right.<ref> {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090328115616/https://info.worldbank.org/governance/wgi/sc_country.asp |date=28 March 2009 }}, ].</ref> Other evaluations such as the ] Rule of Law Index<ref>{{Cite web |title=WJP Rule of Law Index |url=https://worldjusticeproject.org/rule-of-law-index |access-date=2023-02-08 |website=worldjusticeproject.org |language=en}}</ref> show that adherence to rule of law fell in 61% of countries in 2022. Globally, this means that 4.4 billion people live in countries where rule of law declined in 2021.<ref>{{Cite web |title=WJP Rule of Law Index Insights |url=https://worldjusticeproject.org/rule-of-law-index/insights |access-date=2023-02-08 |website=worldjusticeproject.org |language=en}}</ref>

===Europe===
The preamble of the rule of law ] says "the governments of European countries which are like-minded and have a common heritage of political traditions, ideals, freedom and the rule of law".

In France and Germany the concepts of rule of law (''Etat de droit'' and ''Rechtsstaat'' respectively) are analogous to the principles of constitutional supremacy and protection of fundamental rights from public authorities, particularly the ].<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Pech|first1=Laurent|title=Rule of Law in France|journal=Middlesex University – School of Law|ssrn=929099|date=10 September 2006}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal|last1=Letourneur|first1=M.|last2=Drago|first2=R.|title=The Rule of Law as Understood in France|journal=The American Journal of Comparative Law|date=1958|volume=7|issue=2|pages=147–177|doi=10.2307/837562|jstor=837562}}</ref> France was one of the early pioneers of the ideas of the rule of law.<ref>{{cite book|last1=Peerenboom|first1=Randall|title=Asian discourses of rule of law : theories and implementation of rule of law in twelve Asian countries, France and the U.S.|date=2004|publisher=RoutledgeCurzon|isbn=978-0-415-32612-4|page=81|edition=Digital printing.|chapter-url=https://books.google.com/books?id=NCXJFFudGd0C&pg=PA81|chapter=Rule of Law in France}}</ref> The German interpretation is more rigid but similar to that of France and the United Kingdom.<ref>{{cite book|title=Rule of Law in China: A Comparative Approach|date=2014|publisher=Springer|isbn=978-3-662-44622-5|pages=77–78|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=c7gjBQAAQBAJ&pg=PA76}}</ref><ref>{{cite book|editor1-last=Zurn|editor1-first=Michael|editor2-last=Nollkaemper|editor2-first=Andre|editor3-last=Peerenboom|editor3-first=Randy|title=Rule of Law Dynamics: In an Era of International and Transnational Governance|date=2012|publisher=Cambridge University Press|isbn=978-1-139-51097-4|pages=116–117|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=pAAgAwAAQBAJ&pg=PA117}}</ref>

====United Kingdom====
{{Main|Rule of law in the United Kingdom}}
{{See also|History of the constitution of the United Kingdom}}
In the United Kingdom the rule of law is a long-standing principle of the way the country is governed, dating from England's ] in 1215 and the ].<ref name=TSC-RoL-brief /><ref>{{cite web|title=Rule of Law|url=https://www.bl.uk/onlinegallery/takingliberties/staritemsruleoflaw.html|publisher=The British Library|access-date=3 October 2014}}</ref><ref>See also {{cite web|title=The rule of law and the prosecutor|url=https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/the-rule-of-law-and-the-prosecutor|publisher=Attorney General's Office|access-date=20 November 2014|date=9 September 2013|archive-date=24 July 2019|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190724004543/https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/the-rule-of-law-and-the-prosecutor|url-status=live}}</ref> In the 19th century classic work ''Introduction to the Study of the Law of the Constitution'' (1885), ], a constitutional scholar and lawyer, wrote of the twin pillars of the ]: the rule of law and ].<ref>{{cite book|first1=John|last1=Hostettler|title=Champions of the rule of law|date=2011|publisher=Waterside Press|isbn=978-1-904380-68-9|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=Eh7bCgAAQBAJ&pg=PA32|page=23}}</ref>

===Americas===

====United States====
{{United States constitutional law}}
All government officers of the United States, including the ], ], state judges and legislators, and all ], pledge first and foremost to uphold the ], affirming that the rule of law is superior to the rule of any human leader.<ref>Vile, Josh (2006). ''''. Greenwood Publishing Group. p. 80</ref> At the same time, the ] has considerable discretion: the legislative branch is free to decide what statutes it will write, as long as it stays within its ] and respects the constitutionally protected ]. Likewise, the judicial branch has a degree of ],<ref>'''', 22 U.S. 738 (1824): "When are said to exercise a discretion, it is a mere legal discretion, a discretion to be exercised in discerning the course prescribed by law; and, when that is discerned, it is the duty of the court to follow it."</ref> and the executive branch also has various discretionary powers including ].

] said during the ] in 1787 that, "Laws may be unjust, may be unwise, may be dangerous, may be destructive; and yet not be so unconstitutional as to justify the Judges in refusing to give them effect." ] agreed that judges "could declare an unconstitutional law void. But with regard to every law, however unjust, oppressive or pernicious, which did not come plainly under this description, they would be under the necessity as judges to give it a free course."<ref>Snowiss, Sylvia. '''', pp. 41–42 (Yale University Press 1990).</ref> Chief Justice ] a similar position in 1827: "When its existence as law is denied, that existence cannot be proved by showing what are the qualities of a law."<ref>''Ogden v. Saunders'', {{ussc|25|213|1827|pin=347}}. This was Marshall's only dissent in a constitutional case. The ] ] later denounced Marshall for this part of his ''Ogden'' dissent. See {{cite book |last=Spooner |first=Lysander |title=Let's Abolish Government |publisher=Ludwig Von Mises Institute |year=2008 |page=87}} These same issues were also discussed in an earlier U.S. Supreme Court case, ''Calder v. Bull'', {{ussc|3|386|1798}}, with Justices ] and ] taking opposite positions. See Presser, Stephen. "Symposium: Samuel Chase: In Defense of the Rule of Law and Against the Jeffersonians", '']'', vol. 62, p. 349 (March 2009).</ref>

Scholars continue to debate whether the U.S. Constitution adopted a particular interpretation of the "rule of law", and if so, which one. For example, John Harrison asserts that the word "law" in the Constitution is simply defined as that which is legally binding, rather than being "defined by formal or substantive criteria", and therefore judges do not have discretion to decide that laws fail to satisfy such unwritten and vague criteria.<ref>Harrison, John. "Substantive Due Process and the Constitutional Text," '']'', vol. 83, p. 493 (1997).</ref> Law professor ] disagrees, writing that ], ], ], and the framers of the U.S. Constitution believed that an unjust law was not really a law at all.<ref>]. , ''Emory Law Journal'', vol. 58, pp. 585–673 (2009). See also Edlin, Douglas, ", ''Polity'', vol. 38, pp. 345–368 (2006).</ref>

Some modern scholars contend that the rule of law has been corroded during the past century by the instrumental view of law promoted by ] such as ] and ]. For example, Brian Tamanaha asserts: "The rule of law is a centuries-old ideal, but the notion that law is a means to an end became entrenched only in the course of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries."<ref>Tamanaha, Brian. ''How an Instrumental View of Law Corrodes the Rule of Law'', twelfth annual Clifford Symposium on Tort Law and Social Policy.</ref>

Others argue that the rule of law has survived but was transformed to allow for the exercise of discretion by administrators. For much of American history, the dominant notion of the rule of law in ] has been some version of Dicey's, that is, individuals should be able to challenge an administrative order by bringing suit in a court of general jurisdiction. The increased number of administrative cases led to fears that excess judicial oversight over administrative decisions would overwhelm the courts and destroy the advantages of specialization that led to the creation of administrative agencies in the first place. By 1941, a compromise had emerged. If administrators adopted procedures that more or less tracked "the ordinary legal manner" of the courts, further review of the facts by "the ordinary Courts of the land" was unnecessary. Thus Dicey's rule of law was recast into a purely procedural form.<ref>Ernst, Daniel R. (2014). ''Tocqueville's Nightmare: The Administrative State Emerges in America, 1900–1940''. Oxford University Press. {{ISBN|978-0-19-992086-0}}{{page needed|date=March 2022}}</ref>

On July 1, 2024, in ], the Supreme Court held that presidents have absolute immunity for acts committed as president within their core constitutional purview, at least presumptive immunity for official acts within the outer perimeter of their official responsibility, and no immunity for unofficial acts.<ref name="ruling">{{cite news|url=https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/supreme-court/supreme-court-rules-trump-may-immunity-federal-election-inter-rcna149135|title=Supreme Court provides win to Trump, ruling he has immunity for many acts in election interference indictment|first=Lawrence|last=Hurley|publisher=NBC News|date=July 1, 2024|accessdate=July 1, 2024|archive-date=July 1, 2024|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20240701143716/https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/supreme-court/supreme-court-rules-trump-may-immunity-federal-election-inter-rcna149135|url-status=live}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |last=Fisher |first=Joe |date=2024-07-01 |title=Supreme Court rules Trump has partial immunity for official acts only |url=https://www.upi.com/Top_News/US/2024/07/01/supreme-court-trump-immunity-opinion/2581719843674 |access-date=2024-07-01 |website=United Press International |language=en |archive-date=2024-07-01 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20240701175056/https://www.upi.com/Top_News/US/2024/07/01/supreme-court-trump-immunity-opinion/258171984367url-status=live }}</ref> Legal scholars have warned of the negative impact of this decision on the status of rule of law in the United States.<ref>''For example'', Lempinen, Edward ''''. Berkely News</ref> Prior to that, in 1973 and 2000 the ] within the ] issued opinions saying that a ],<ref>{{Cite news|date=26 February 2019|title=Can a sitting U.S. president face criminal charges?|language=en|work=Reuters|url=https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-russia-indictment-explainer-idUSKCN1QF1D3|access-date=8 January 2022}}</ref><ref>{{cite report|title=A Sitting President's Amenability to Indictment and Criminal Prosecution|date=October 16, 2000|publisher=Office of Legal Counsel|volume=24, Opinions|pages=222–260|url=https://www.justice.gov/d9/olc/opinions/2000/10/31/op-olc-v024-p0222_0.pdf|access-date=January 4, 2024}}</ref> but it is constitutional to indict and try a former president for the same offenses for which the President was ] and ] under the ].<ref>{{cite report|title=Whether a Former President May Be Indicted and Tried for the Same Offenses for Which He Was Impeached by the House and Acquitted by the Senate|date=August 18, 2000|publisher=Office of Legal Counsel|volume=24, Opinions|pages=110–155|url=https://www.justice.gov/d9/olc/opinions/2000/08/31/op-olc-v024-p0110_0.pdf|access-date=January 3, 2024}}</ref><ref>{{cite book|title=The Federalist Papers|editor-first=Clinton|editor-last=Rossiter|editor-link=Clinton Rossiter|publisher=]|year=2003|orig-year=1961|page=544|isbn=978-0-451-52881-0|title-link=The Federalist Papers}}</ref><ref>{{cite report|last1=Cole|first1=Jared P.|last2=Garvey|first2=Todd|date=December 6, 2023|title=Impeachment and the Constitution|publisher=]|pages=14–15|url=https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/R/R46013|access-date=December 29, 2023}}</ref>

Numerous definitions of "rule of law" are used in United States governmental bodies. An organization's definition might depend on that organization's goal. For instance, ] or ] campaigns may necessitate prioritising physical security over human rights.<ref name="JudgeAdvocateLegalSchool" /> U.S. Army doctrine and U.S. Government (USG) interagency agreements might see the rule of law as a principle of governance:<ref name="JudgeAdvocateLegalSchool" /> Outlines of different definitions are given in a ] handbook for judge advocates deployed with the US Army.<ref name="JudgeAdvocateLegalSchool">{{cite book |title=US Army Rule of Law Handbook: A Practitioner’s Guide for Judge Advocates |publisher=] ] |year=2010 |lccn=2013230550 |issn=2328-3394 |url=https://permanent.fdlp.gov/gpo32970/index.htm}}</ref>

====Canada====
In Canada, the rule of law is associated with ]'s view. It is mentioned in the preamble to the ]. ] is "similar in principle" to the ], and includes unwritten constitutional principles of democracy, judicial independence, federalism, constitutionalism and the rule of law, and the protection of minorities.<ref>''],'' 1998 CanLII 793 (SCC), 2 S.C.R. 217, at paras 44-49, see also, ], 2021 SCC 34 at para 49</ref>

In 1959, ], the ] called the Rule of Law a "fundamental postulate" of the ]. According to ], it encompasses, "a sense of orderliness, of subjection to known legal rules and of executive accountability to legal authority." In ], it means that the relationship between the state and the individual must be regulated by law and that the Constitution binds all governments, both ], including the ]. With the adoption of the ], the Canadian system of government was transformed to a significant extent from a system of Parliamentary supremacy to one of constitutional supremacy. The principle of the rule of law and ] is aided by acknowledging that the constitution is ] beyond simple ].<ref>''],'' 2 SCR 217, at paras 70-78</ref> However, ] operates to provide a limited "legislative override" of certain fundamental freedoms contained in the Charter, and has been invoked at different times by provincial legislatures.

In ], "all exercises of public authority must find their source in law. All decision-making powers have legal limits, derived from the enabling statute itself, the common or civil law or the Constitution. ] is the means by which the courts supervise those who exercise statutory powers, to ensure that they do not overstep their legal authority. The function of judicial review is therefore to ensure the legality, the reasonableness and the fairness of the administrative process and its outcomes."<ref>''],'' 2008 SCC 9 (CanLII), 1 SCR 190, at para 28</ref> Administrative decision makers must adopt a culture of justification and demonstrate that their exercise of delegated public power can be “justified to citizens in terms of rationality and fairness.”<ref>''],'' 2019 SCC 65, at para 14, citing the Rt. Hon. B. McLachlin, “The Roles of Administrative Tribunals and Courts in Maintaining the Rule of Law” (1998), 12 C.J.A.L.P. 171, at p. 174</ref>

===Asia===
East Asian cultures are influenced by two schools of thought, ], which advocated good governance as rule by leaders who are benevolent and virtuous, and ], which advocated strict adherence to law. The influence of one school of thought over the other has varied throughout the centuries. One study indicates that throughout East Asia, only South Korea, Singapore, Japan, Taiwan and Hong Kong have societies that are robustly committed to a law-bound state.<ref>Chu, Yun-Han et al. '''', pp. 31–32.</ref> According to Awzar Thi, a member of the ], the rule of law in Cambodia and most of Asia is weak or nonexistent:

<blockquote>Apart from a number of states and territories, across the continent there is a huge gulf between the rule of law rhetoric and reality. In Thailand, the police force is favor over the rich and corrupted. In Cambodia, judges are proxies for the ruling political party ... That a judge may harbor political prejudice or apply the law unevenly are the smallest worries for an ordinary criminal defendant in Asia. More likely ones are: Will the police fabricate the evidence? Will the prosecutor bother to show up? Will the judge fall asleep? Will I be poisoned in prison? Will my case be completed within a decade?<ref>Thi, Awzar.
{{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130507040107/http://www.upiasia.com/Human_Rights/2008/08/14/asia_needs_a_new_rule-of-law_debate/2340/ |date=2013-05-07 }}, ], UPIAsia.com (2008-08-14).</ref></blockquote>

In countries such as China and Vietnam, the transition to a market economy has been a major factor in a move toward the rule of law, because the rule of law is important to foreign investors and to economic development. It remains unclear whether the rule of law in countries like China and Vietnam will be limited to commercial matters or will spill into other areas as well, and if so whether that spillover will enhance prospects for related values such as democracy and human rights.<ref>Peerenboom, Randall ''in'' , p. 39 (Routledge 2004).</ref>

==== China ====
{{See also|Chinese law#Rule of law|Three Supremes}}

In China, the phrase fǎzhì (法治), which can be translated as "rule of law," means using the law as an instrument to facilitate social control.<ref>Linda Chelan Li, The “Rule of Law” Policy in Guangdong: Continuity or Departure? Meaning, Significance and Processes. (2000), 199-220.</ref>

Late Qing dynasty legal reforms unsuccessfully sought to implement Western legal principles including the rule of law and judicial independence.<ref name=":Fang2">{{Cite book |last=Fang |first=Qiang |title=China under Xi Jinping: A New Assessment |publisher=] |year=2024 |isbn=9789087284411 |editor-last=Fang |editor-first=Qiang |chapter=Understanding the Rule of Law in Xi's China |jstor=jj.15136086 |editor-last2=Li |editor-first2=Xiaobing}}</ref>{{Rp|page=122–123}} Judicial independence further decreased in the ] under ] per the ]'s policy of particization (''danghua''), under which administrative judges were required to have "deep comprehension" of the KMT's principles.<ref name=":Fang2" />{{Rp|page=123}}

After China's ], the Communist Party emphasized the rule of law as a basic strategy and method for state management of society.<ref name=":Fang" />{{Rp|page=110}} ] first called for establishing a socialist rule of law at the ] in 1997.<ref name=":Fang">{{Cite book |last=Fang |first=Qiang |title=China under Xi Jinping: A New Assessment |publisher=] |year=2024 |isbn=9789087284411 |editor-last=Fang |editor-first=Qiang |chapter=Understanding the Rule of Law in Xi's China |editor-last2=Li |editor-first2=Xiaobing}}</ref>{{Rp|page=110}} Despite the CCP's ] arguing that Western values have corrupted many people's understanding of the rule of law, the CCP has simultaneously endorsed governing the country in accordance with the rule of law.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Wang |first1=Zhengxu |title=Xi Jinping: the game changer of Chinese elite politics? |journal= Contemporary Politics|date=2016 |volume=22|issue=4 |pages=469–486 |doi=10.1080/13569775.2016.1175098 |s2cid=156316938 |url=https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/13569775.2016.1175098 |access-date=24 September 2023}}</ref> These factors likely suggest that the CCP is creating a rule of law with Chinese characteristics, which may simply entail modifying the Western notion of rule of law to best match China's unique political, social, and historical conditions. As Document 9 suggests, the CCP does not see judicial independence, separation of power, or constitutional forms of governance as defined by Western society, as suiting China's unique form of governance.<ref>{{cite web |last1=Creemers |first1=Rogier |title=Communiqué on the Current State of the Ideological Sphere (Document No. 9) |url=https://digichina.stanford.edu/work/communique-on-the-current-state-of-the-ideological-sphere-document-no-9/ |website=DigiChina |publisher=Stanford University |access-date=24 September 2023}}</ref><ref name="Stiftung Wissenschaft und Politik">{{cite journal |last1=Rudolf |first1=Moritz |title=Xi Jinping Thought on the Rule of Law |url=https://www.swp-berlin.org/10.18449/2021C28/ |journal=SWP Comment |date=2021 |publisher=Stiftung Wissenschaft und Politik |doi=10.18449/2021C28 |s2cid=235350466 |access-date=24 September 2023}}</ref> This unique version of the rule of law with Chinese characteristics has led to different attempts to define China's method of governing the country by rule of law domestically and internationally.<ref>{{cite web |last1=Chen |first1=Wang |title=Xi Jinping Thought on the Rule of Law Is a New Development and New Leap ... |url=https://interpret.csis.org/translations/xi-jinping-thought-on-the-rule-of-law-is-a-new-development-and-new-leap-forward-in-the-sinicization-of-marxist-theory-on-the-rule-of-law/ |website=CSIS Interpret: China |publisher=CSIS |access-date=24 September 2023}}</ref><ref name="Stiftung Wissenschaft und Politik" />

In his writings on socialist rule of law in China, ] has emphasized traditional Chinese concepts including people as the root of the state (''mingben''), "the ideal of no lawsuit" (''tianxia wusong''), "respecting rite and stressing law" (''longli zhongfa''), "virtue first, penalty second" (''dezhu xingfu''), and "promoting virtue and being prudent in punishment" (''mingde shenfa'').<ref name=":Fang" />{{Rp|pages=110–111}} Xi states that the two fundamental aspects of the socialist rule of law are: that the political and legal organs (including courts, the police, and the procuratorate) must believe in the law and uphold the law; and all political and legal officials must follow the Communist Party.<ref name=":Fang" />{{Rp|page=115}}

==== India ====
The ] is intended to limit opportunities for governmental discretion, and the judiciary uses ] to uphold the Constitution, especially the ].<ref>Baxi, Upendra ''in'' , pp. 336–337 (Routledge 2004).</ref> Although some people have criticized the Indian judiciary for its ],<ref>Robinson, Simon. , '']'' (8 November 2006).</ref> others believe such actions are needed to safeguard the rule of law based on the Constitution as well as to preserve ], an important part of the ].<ref>{{cite news|author=Staff writer|date=2 September 2011|title=Do we need judicial activism?|url=https://www.news18.com/news/india/do-we-need-judicial-activism-397207.html|access-date=15 January 2022}}</ref>

==== Japan ====
Japan had centuries of tradition prior to ], during which there were laws, but they did not provide a central organizing principle for society, and they did not constrain the powers of government.<ref>(Boadi, 2001)</ref> As the 21st century began, the percentage of people who were lawyers and judges in Japan remained very low relative to western Europe and the United States, and legislation in Japan tended to be terse and general, leaving much discretion in the hands of bureaucrats.<ref>Green, Carl. {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080623094753/https://www.asiasociety.org/speeches/green.html |date=23 June 2008 }}, Speech to the ] (14 March 2001).</ref><ref>See also {{cite book|last1=Goodman|first1=Carl F.|title=The rule of law in Japan : a comparative analysis|date=2008|publisher=Wolters Kluwer Law & Business|isbn=978-90-411-2750-1|edition=2nd rev.|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=xIsmHbijQesC}}{{Dead link|date=January 2023 |bot=InternetArchiveBot |fix-attempted=yes }}</ref>

==== Singapore ====
{{Main article|Rule of law doctrine in Singapore}}

==Organisations==
{{Multiple issues|section=yes|
{{One source section|date=October 2023}}
{{Third-party|section|date=October 2023}}
}}
Various organizations are involved in promoting the rule of law.

=== EU Commission ===
{{further|Category:Rule of law missions of the European Union}}
The rule of law is enshrined in Article 2 of the Treaty on European Union as one of the common values for all Member States. Under the rule of law, all public powers always act within the constraints set out by law, in accordance with the values of democracy and fundamental rights, and under the control of independent and impartial courts. The rule of law includes principles such as legality, implying a transparent, accountable, democratic and pluralistic process for enacting laws; legal certainty; prohibiting the arbitrary exercise of executive power; effective judicial protection by independent and impartial courts, effective judicial review including respect for fundamental rights; separation of powers; and equality before the law. These principles have been recognised by the European Court of Justice and the European Court of Human Rights. In addition, the Council of Europe has developed standards and issued opinions and recommendations which provide well-established guidance to promote and uphold the rule of law.<ref>{{cite web |title= Communication From the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions 2020 Rule of Law Report The rule of law situation in the European Union |url=https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?qid=1602583951529&uri=CELEX%3A52020DC0580 |website=EUR-Lex |access-date=3 August 2022 |language=en }} ] Text was copied from this source, which is available under a {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20171016050101/https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ |date=2017-10-16 }}.</ref>

=== The Council of Europe ===
] of ] characterizes the rule of law as one of the core principles which the establishment of the organization based on. The paragraph 3 of the preamble of the Statute of the Council of Europe states: "Reaffirming their devotion to the spiritual and moral values which are the common heritage of their peoples and the true source of individual freedom, political liberty and the rule of law, principles which form the basis of all genuine democracy." The Statute lays the compliance with the rule of law principles as a condition for the European states to be a full member of the organization.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://rm.coe.int/1680306052 |publisher=Council of Europe |title=Statute of the Council of Europe|access-date=2017-12-07|archive-date=2019-12-30|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20191230081705/https://rm.coe.int/1680306052|url-status=live}}</ref>

===International Commission of Jurists===
In 1959, an event took place in ] and speaking as the ], made a declaration as to the fundamental principle of the rule of law. The event consisted of over 185 judges, lawyers, and law professors from 53 countries. This later became known as the ]. During the declaration they declared that the rule of law implied certain rights and freedoms, an independent judiciary, and social, economic and cultural conditions conducive to human dignity. One aspect not included in The Declaration of Delhi was for rule of law requiring legislative power to be subject to ].<ref>Goldsworthy, Jeffrey. in Tom Campbell, Keith D. Ewing and Adam Tomkins (eds), ''Sceptical Essays on Human Rights'' (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001), p. 69.</ref>

===United Nations===
The ] defines the rule of law as:<ref> {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190924112236/https://www.unrol.org/article.aspx?article_id=3 |date=24 September 2019 }}, United Nations Rule of Law.</ref>
<blockquote>
a principle of governance in which all persons, institutions and entities, public and private, including the State itself, are accountable to laws that are publicly promulgated, equally enforced and independently adjudicated, and which are consistent with international human rights norms and standards. It requires, as well, measures to ensure adherence to the principles of supremacy of law, equality before the law, accountability to the law, fairness in the application of the law, separation of powers, participation in decision-making, legal certainty, avoidance of arbitrariness and procedural and legal transparency.</blockquote>

The General Assembly has considered rule of law an agenda item since 1992, with renewed interest since 2006 and has adopted resolutions at its last three sessions.<ref>See United Nations General Assembly Resolutions A/RES/61/39, A/RES/62/70, A/RES/63/128.</ref> The Security Council has held a number of thematic debates on the rule of law,<ref>See United Nations Security Council debates S/PRST/2003/15, S/PRST/2004/2, S/PRST/2004/32, S/PRST/2005/30, S/PRST/2006/28.</ref> and adopted resolutions emphasizing the importance of these issues in the context of women, peace and security,<ref>See United Nations Security Council Resolutions 1325 and 1820.</ref> children in armed conflict,<ref>E.g. see United Nations Security Council Resolution 1612.</ref> and the protection of civilians in armed conflict.<ref>E.g. see United Nations Security Council Resolution 1674.</ref> The ] has also regularly addressed rule of law issues with respect to countries on its agenda.<ref>.</ref> The ] also requires the rule of law be included in ].<ref>] Part II, paragraph 79</ref> Additionally, the ], a component of the 2030 Agenda is aimed at promoting the rule of law at national and international levels.<ref>{{Cite web|last=Doss|first=Eric|title=Sustainable Development Goal 16|url=https://www.un.org/ruleoflaw/sdg-16/|access-date=25 September 2020|website=United Nations and the Rule of Law|language=en-US|archive-date=20 December 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20211220024335/https://www.un.org/ruleoflaw/sdg-16/|url-status=live}}</ref>

In Our Common Agenda, the ] ] wrote in paragraph 23: "In support of efforts to put people at the center of justice systems, I will promote a new vision for the rule of law, building on Sustainable Development Goal 16 and the 2012 Declaration of the High-level Meeting of the General Assembly on the Rule of Law at the National and International Levels."<ref>{{Cite web |title=Secretary-General's report on "Our Common Agenda" |url=https://www.un.org/en/content/common-agenda-report/ |website=www.un.org}}</ref>

===International Bar Association===
The Council of the ] passed a resolution in 2009 endorsing a substantive or "thick" definition of the rule of law:<ref> {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210224231659/https://www.ibanet.org/Document/Default.aspx?DocumentUid=9925C6FD-5804-407F-9D39-ECB9D6A8B9D4 |date=February 24, 2021 }}.</ref>

<blockquote>An independent, impartial judiciary; the presumption of innocence; the right to a fair and public trial without undue delay; a rational and proportionate approach to punishment; a strong and independent legal profession; strict protection of confidential communications between lawyer and client; equality of all before the law; these are all fundamental principles of the Rule of Law. Accordingly, arbitrary arrests; secret trials; indefinite detention without trial; cruel or degrading treatment or punishment; intimidation or corruption in the electoral process, are all unacceptable. The Rule of Law is the foundation of a civilised society. It establishes a transparent process accessible and equal to all. It ensures adherence to principles that both liberate and protect. The IBA calls upon all countries to respect these fundamental principles. It also calls upon its members to speak out in support of the Rule of Law within their respective communities.</blockquote>

===World Justice Project===
]'' above ]. In 2023, the ] ranked ] no. 1 on the their Rule of Law Index<ref>{{Cite web |date=2023-10-25 |title=WJP Rule of Law Index 2023 Global Press Release |url=https://worldjusticeproject.org/news/wjp-rule-law-index-2023-global-press-release |access-date=2024-12-11 |website=World Justice Project |language=en}}</ref>]]
The World Justice Project (WJP)<ref>{{Cite web |title=World Justice Project {{!}} Advancing the rule of law worldwide |url=https://worldjusticeproject.org/ |access-date=2023-02-08 |website=World Justice Project |language=en}}</ref> is an international organization that produces independent research and data, in order to build awareness, and stimulate action to advance the rule of law.<ref>{{Cite web |title=WJP {{!}} Our Work |url=https://worldjusticeproject.org/our-work |access-date=2023-02-08 |website=World Justice Project |language=en}}</ref>

The World Justice Project defines the rule of law as a durable system of laws, institutions, norms, and country commitment that uphold four universal principles:<ref>{{Cite web |title=WJP {{!}} What is Rule of Law? |url=https://worldjusticeproject.org/about-us/overview/what-rule-law |access-date=2023-02-08 |website=World Justice Project |language=en}}</ref>

# Accountability: the government and its officials and agents are accountable under the law.
# Just Law: the law is clear, publicized, and stable, and is applied evenly. It ensures human rights as well as properly, contract, and procedural rights.
# Open Government: the processes enforced are accessible, fair, and efficient.
# Accessible and Impartial Justice: justice is delivered timely by competent, ethical, and independent representatives and neutrals who are accessible, have adequate resources, and reflect the makeup of the communities they serve.

Their flagship WJP Rule of Law Index,<ref>{{Cite web |title=WJP {{!}} Explore the methodology, insights, dataset, and interactive data |url=https://worldjusticeproject.org/rule-of-law-index |access-date=2023-02-08 |website=worldjusticeproject.org |language=en}}</ref> measures the extent to which 140 countries and jurisdictions<ref>{{Cite web |title=WJP {{!}} Download the full report |url=https://worldjusticeproject.org/rule-of-law-index |access-date=2023-02-08 |website=worldjusticeproject.org |language=en}}</ref> adhere to the rule of law across eight dimensions:<ref>{{Cite web |title=WJP Rule of Law Index Factors |url=https://worldjusticeproject.org/rule-of-law-index |access-date=2023-02-08 |website=worldjusticeproject.org |language=en}}</ref> ], ], ], ], ], ], ], and ].

===International Development Law Organization===
The ] (IDLO) is an intergovernmental organization with a joint focus on the promotion of rule of law and development. It works to empower people and communities to claim their rights, and provides governments with the know-how to realize them.<ref name="IDLO - What we Do">{{cite web|title=IDLO – What We Do|url=https://www.idlo.int/what-we-do|website=idlo.int|date=24 February 2014|access-date=7 February 2015}}</ref> It supports emerging economies and middle-income countries to strengthen their legal capacity and rule of law framework for sustainable development and economic opportunity.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.idlo.int/about-idlo/strategic-plan|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150208164000/https://idlo.int/about-idlo/strategic-plan|url-status=dead|title=IDLO Strategic Plan|archive-date=8 February 2015}}</ref> It is the only intergovernmental organization with an exclusive mandate to promote the rule of law and has experience working in more than 90 countries around the world.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.idlo.int/about-idlo/about-idlo|title=About IDLO|date=26 February 2014|website=IDLO – International Development Law Organization|access-date=30 March 2022|archive-date=2 October 2019|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20191002115427/https://www.idlo.int/about-idlo/mission-and-history|url-status=live}}</ref>

The International Development Law Organization has a holistic definition of the rule of law:

<blockquote>More than a matter of due process, the rule of law is an enabler of justice and development. The three notions are interdependent; when realized, they are mutually reinforcing. For IDLO, as much as a question of laws and procedure, the rule of law is a culture and daily practice. It is inseparable from equality, from access to justice and education, from access to health and the protection of the most vulnerable. It is crucial for the viability of communities and nations, and for the environment that sustains them.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.idlo.int/what-we-do/rule-law|title=Rule of Law|date=February 24, 2014|website=IDLO – International Development Law Organization|access-date=February 15, 2022|archive-date=October 2, 2019|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20191002112317/https://www.idlo.int/what-we-do/rule-law|url-status=live}}</ref></blockquote>

=== International Network to Promote the Rule of Law ===
The ] is an international network of law practitioners working on rule of law issues in post-conflict and developing countries from a policy, practice and research perspective. INPROL is based at the ] in partnership with the US Department of State Bureau of International Narcotics and Law Enforcement, the ] Strategic Police Matters Unit, the Center of Excellence for Police Stability Unit, and ] in the United States.<ref>{{Cite web |url=https://inprol.org/about-inprol |title=INPROL &#124; Home |access-date=9 February 2017 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170202002311/https://inprol.org/about-inprol |archive-date=2 February 2017 |url-status=dead }}</ref>


==See also== ==See also==
{{div col}}
*]
* {{annotated link|Consent of the governed}}
*]
* {{annotated link|Constitutional liberalism}}
*]
* {{annotated link|Due process}}
*]
* {{annotated link|Equality before the law}}
*]
* {{annotated link|Habeas corpus}}
*]
* {{annotated link|International Network to Promote the Rule of Law}}
*]
*] * {{annotated link|Judicial activism}}
* {{annotated link|Law of the jungle}}
*]
* {{annotated link|Legal certainty}}
*]
* {{annotated link|Legal doctrine}}
*]
* {{annotated link|Liberal international order}}
*]
* {{annotated link|Might makes right}}
*]
* {{annotated link|Minority rights}}
*]
* {{annotated link|Nuremberg principles}}
*]
* {{annotated link|Ochlocracy}} (mob rule)
*]
* {{annotated link|Philosophy of law}}
*]
* {{annotated link|Public interest law}}
*]
* {{annotated link|Rechtsstaat}}
*]
* {{annotated link|Right of conquest}}
*]
* {{annotated link|Rule of man}}
* {{annotated link|Separation of powers}}
* {{annotated link|Social contract}}
* {{annotated link|Sovereign immunity}}
{{div col end}}

===Legal scholars===
* {{annotated link|Thomas Bingham, Baron Bingham of Cornhill}}
* {{annotated link|A. V. Dicey}}
* {{annotated link|Joseph Raz}}

==Sources==
{{Free-content attribution
| title = Strengthening the rule of law through education: A guide for policymakers
| author =
| publisher = UNESCO
| page numbers = 63
| source =
| documentURL = https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000366771
| license statement URL = https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000366771
| license = CC BY-SA
}}

==Notes and references==
{{Reflist}}

==Bibliography==
* {{cite book | last=Bingham | first=Thomas | author-link = Tom Bingham, Baron Bingham of Cornhill | title=The rule of law | publisher=Allen Lane | location=London New York | year=2010 | isbn=978-1-84614-090-7 | oclc=458734142}}
* {{cite book | last=Dworkin | first=Ronald | author-link = Ronald Dworkin | title=A Matter of Principle | publisher=Harvard University Press | location=Cambridge, Massachusetts| year=1985 | isbn=0674554604}}
* {{Cite journal|last=Gowder|first=Paul|date=Winter 2018|title=Resisting the Rule of Men|url=https://scholarship.law.slu.edu/lj/vol62/iss2/8|journal=Saint Louis University Law Journal|volume=62|issue=2}}
* {{cite book|last=Oakeshott| first=Michael|title=Lectures in the History of Political Thought|year=2006|publisher=Imprint Academic|location=Exeter, UK|isbn=978-1-84540-093-4|oclc=63185299|pages=515|author-link=Michael Oakeshott|editor=Terry Nardin and Luke O'Sullivan|chapter=Chapters 31 and 32}}
* ], ''The Forgotten Man: A New History of the Great Depression'', .
* Torre, Alessandro, ''United Kingdom'', Il Mulino, Bologna, 2005.{{ISBN?}}{{Page needed|date=March 2022}}


==Further reading== ==Further reading==
* {{cite encyclopedia |last=Barry|first=Norman |author-link= |editor-first=Ronald |editor-last=Hamowy |editor-link=Ronald Hamowy |encyclopedia=The Encyclopedia of Libertarianism |chapter=Rule of Law |chapter-url=https://sk.sagepub.com/reference/libertarianism/n273.xml|url= https://books.google.com/books?id=yxNgXs3TkJYC |doi=10.4135/9781412965811.n273 |year=2008 |publisher= ]; ] |location= Thousand Oaks, CA |isbn= 978-1412965804 |oclc=750831024| lccn = 2008009151 |pages=445–447}}
*Craig, Paul. "Formal and Substantive Conceptions of the Rule of Law: An Analytical Framework" Public Law pp. 467-487 (1997)
* Kessler, Jeremy (13 December 2024). . ''Law & Contemporary Problems'', Volume 87, 2025.
* {{cite journal|last=McDermott|first=John|url=https://digitalcommons.lmu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1411&context=ilr|title=The Rule of Law in Hong Kong after 1997|journal=]|date=1 January 1997}}


==External links== ==External links==
{{Wikiquote}}
*
* International Network for the Promotion of Rule of Law, an association of rule of law professionals designed to foster discussion and cooperation on issues related to the establishment of the rule of law.
* University of Iowa Center for International Finance and Development
* An audio or written analysis of the Rule of Law by ] (the senior ] and so effectively the chief justice of the UK supreme court) is available at the (Faculty, of Law, University of Cambridge).
* Canada-based Rule of Law ''Think Tank'' providing legal resources helpful in aid for the better advancement of the Rule of Law.
* Worldwide ratings of country performances on Rule of Law and other governance dimensions from 1996 to present.
* How rule of law is to be understood in the UK system
*
* from The Economist print edition, March 13, 2008.


* '''', includes academic articles, practitioner reports, commentary, and book reviews.
]
* A multinational, multidisciplinary initiative to strengthen the rule of law worldwide.
]
* '''', Wiki-Project of Freie Universitaet Berlin.
]
*
]
* Frithjof Ehm
* {{cite web|last=Mańko|first=Rafał|title=Using 'scoreboards' to assess justice systems|url=https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/bibliotheque/briefing/2013/130502/LDM_BRI(2013)130502_REV1_EN.pdf|work=Library Briefing|publisher=Library of the European Parliament|access-date=23 July 2013}}


{{Law}}
]
{{Western culture}}
]
{{Authority control}}
]
{{Portal bar|Law|Politics}}
]

]
{{DEFAULTSORT:Rule Of Law}}
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]

Latest revision as of 19:59, 25 December 2024

Political situation in which everyone is subject to the law "Rule of Law" redirects here. For other uses, see Rule of Law (disambiguation). Not to be confused with Rule according to higher law.
A mosaic representing both the judicial and legislative aspects of law. The woman on the throne holds a sword to chastise the guilty and a palm branch to reward the meritorious. Glory surrounds her head and the aegis of Minerva signifies the armor of righteousness and wisdom.
Part of the Politics series
Politics
Primary topics
Political systems
Academic disciplines
Public administration
Policy
Government branches
Related topics
Subseries
icon Politics portal
Conflict resolution
Nonviolence
Workplace
Violence
International relations
Nuclear
Other

The rule of law is a political and legal ideal that all people and institutions within a country, state, or community are accountable to the same laws, including lawmakers, government officials, and judges. It is sometimes stated simply as "no one is above the law" or "all are equal before the law". According to Encyclopædia Britannica, it is defined as "the mechanism, process, institution, practice, or norm that supports the equality of all citizens before the law, secures a nonarbitrary form of government, and more generally prevents the arbitrary use of power."

Use of the phrase can be traced to 16th-century Britain. In the following century, Scottish theologian Samuel Rutherford employed it in arguing against the divine right of kings. John Locke wrote that freedom in society means being subject only to laws written by a legislature that apply to everyone, with a person being otherwise free from both governmental and private restrictions of liberty. The phrase "rule of law" was further popularized in the 19th century by British jurist A. V. Dicey. However, the principle, if not the phrase itself, was recognized by ancient thinkers. Aristotle wrote: "It is more proper that law should govern than any one of the citizens."

The term rule of law is closely related to constitutionalism as well as Rechtsstaat. It refers to a political situation, not to any specific legal rule. Distinct is the rule of man, where one person or group of persons rule arbitrarily.

History

Although credit for popularizing the expression "the rule of law" in modern times is usually given to A. V. Dicey, development of the legal concept can be traced through history to many ancient civilizations, including ancient Greece, Mesopotamia, India, and Rome.

Early history (to 15th century)

The earliest conception of rule of law can be traced back to the Indian epics Ramayana and Mahabharata - the earliest versions of which date around to 8th or 9th centuries BC. The Mahabharata deals with the concepts of Dharma (used to mean law and duty interchangeably), Rajdharma (duty of the king) and Dharmaraja and states in one of its slokas that, "A King who after having sworn that he shall protect his subjects fails to protect them should be executed like a mad dog," and also that, "The people should execute a king who does not protect them, but deprives them of their property and assets and who takes no advice or guidance from any one. Such a king is not a king but misfortune."

Other sources for the philosophy of rule of law can be traced to the Upanishads which state that, "The law is the king of the kings. No one is higher than the law. Not even the king." Other commentaries include Kautilya's Arthashastra (4th-century BC), Manusmriti (dated to the 1st to 3rd century CE), Yajnavalkya-Smriti (dated between the 3rd and 5th century CE), Brihaspati Smriti (dated between 15 CE and 16 CE).

Ancient Greece

Several scholars have also traced the concept of the rule of law back to 4th-century BC Athens, seeing it either as the dominant value of the Athenian democracy, or as one held in conjunction with the concept of popular sovereignty. However, these arguments have been challenged and the present consensus is that upholding an abstract concept of the rule of law was not "the predominant consideration" of the Athenian legal system. Aristotle, in his Politics, wrote: "It is more proper that law should govern than any one of the citizens: upon the same principle, if it is advantageous to place the supreme power in some particular persons, they should be appointed to be only guardians, and the servants of the laws."

The idea of the rule of law can be regarded as a modern iteration of the ideas of ancient Greek philosophers, who argued that the best form of government was rule by the best men. Plato advocated a benevolent monarchy ruled by an idealized philosopher king, who was above the law. Plato nevertheless hoped that the best men would be good at respecting established laws, explaining that "Where the law is subject to some other authority and has none of its own, the collapse of the state, in my view, is not far off; but if law is the master of the government and the government is its slave, then the situation is full of promise and men enjoy all the blessings that the gods shower on a state." In contrast, Aristotle flatly opposed letting the highest officials wield power beyond guarding and serving the laws. In other words, Aristotle advocated the rule of law:

It is more proper that law should govern than any one of the citizens: upon the same principle, if it is advantageous to place the supreme power in some particular persons, they should be appointed to be only guardians, and the servants of the laws.

The Roman statesman Cicero is often cited as saying, roughly: "We are all servants of the laws in order to be free." During the Roman Republic, controversial magistrates might be put on trial when their terms of office expired. Under the Roman Empire, the sovereign was personally immune (legibus solutus), but those with grievances could sue the treasury.

China

In China, members of the school of legalism during the 3rd century BC argued for using law as a tool of governance, but they promoted "rule by law" as opposed to "rule of law," meaning that they placed the aristocrats and emperor above the law. In contrast, the Huang–Lao school of Daoism rejected legal positivism in favor of a natural law that even the ruler would be subject to.

The ancient concept of rule of law can be distinguished from rule by law, according to political science professor Li Shuguang: "The difference ... is that, under the rule of law, the law is preeminent and can serve as a check against the abuse of power. Under rule by law, the law is a mere tool for a government, that suppresses in a legalistic fashion."

England

Alfred the Great, Anglo-Saxon king in the 9th century, reformed the law of his kingdom and assembled a law code (the Doom Book) which he grounded on biblical commandments. He held that the same law had to be applied to all persons, whether rich or poor, friends or enemies. This was likely inspired by Leviticus 19:15: "You shall do no iniquity in judgment. You shall not favor the wretched and you shall not defer to the rich. In righteousness you are to judge your fellow."

In 1215, Archbishop Stephen Langton gathered the Barons in England and restricted the powers of King John and future sovereigns and magistrates under the rule of law, preserving ancient liberties by Magna Carta in return for exacting taxes. The influence of Magna Carta ebbed and waned across centuries. The weakening of royal power it demonstrated was based more upon the instability presented by contested claims than thoughtful adherence to constitutional principles. Until 1534, the Church excommunicated people for violations, but after a time Magna Carta was simply replaced by other statutes considered binding upon the king to act according to "process of the law". Magna Carta's influence is considered greatly diminished by the reign of Henry VI, after the Wars of the Roses. The ideas contained in Magna Carta are widely considered to have influenced the United States Constitution.

The first known use of this English phrase occurred around 1500. Another early example of the phrase "rule of law" is found in a petition to James I of England in 1610, from the House of Commons:

Amongst many other points of happiness and freedom which your majesty's subjects of this kingdom have enjoyed under your royal progenitors, kings and queens of this realm, there is none which they have accounted more dear and precious than this, to be guided and governed by the certain rule of the law which giveth both to the head and members that which of right belongeth to them, and not by any uncertain or arbitrary form of government ...

Modern period (1500 CE – present)

See also: Rechtsstaat
Part of the Politics series
Republicanism
Concepts
Schools
Types
Philosophers
Politicians
Theoretical works
History
National variants
Related topics
icon Politics portal

In 1481, during the reign of Ferdinand II of Aragon, the Constitució de l'Observança was approved by the General Court of Catalonia, establishing the submission of royal power (included its officers) to the laws of the Principality of Catalonia.

In 1607, English Chief Justice Sir Edward Coke said in the Case of Prohibitions "that the law was the golden met-wand and measure to try the causes of the subjects; and which protected His Majesty in safety and peace: with which the King was greatly offended, and said, that then he should be under the law, which was treason to affirm, as he said; to which I said, that Bracton saith, quod Rex non debet esse sub homine, sed sub Deo et lege (That the King ought not to be under any man but under God and the law.)."

Among the first modern authors to use the term and give the principle theoretical foundations was Samuel Rutherford in Lex, Rex (1644). The title, Latin for "the law is king", subverts the traditional formulation rex lex ("the king is law"). James Harrington wrote in Oceana (1656), drawing principally on Aristotle's Politics, that among forms of government an "Empire of Laws, and not of Men" was preferable to an "Empire of Men, and not of Laws".

John Locke also discussed this issue in his Second Treatise of Government (1690):

The natural liberty of man is to be free from any superior power on earth, and not to be under the will or legislative authority of man, but to have only the law of nature for his rule. The liberty of man, in society, is to be under no other legislative power, but that established, by consent, in the commonwealth; nor under the dominion of any will, or restraint of any law, but what that legislative shall enact, according to the trust put in it. Freedom then is not what Sir Robert Filmer tells us, Observations, A. 55. a liberty for every one to do what he lists, to live as he pleases, and not to be tied by any laws: but freedom of men under government is, to have a standing rule to live by, common to every one of that society, and made by the legislative power erected in it; a liberty to follow my own will in all things, where the rule prescribes not; and not to be subject to the inconstant, uncertain, unknown, arbitrary will of another man: as freedom of nature is, to be under no other restraint but the law of nature.

The principle was also discussed by Montesquieu in The Spirit of Law (1748). The phrase "rule of law" appears in Samuel Johnson's Dictionary (1755).

In 1776, the notion that no one is above the law was popular during the founding of the United States. For example, Thomas Paine wrote in his pamphlet Common Sense that "in America, the law is king. For as in absolute governments the King is law, so in free countries the law ought to be king; and there ought to be no other." In 1780, John Adams enshrined this principle in Article VI of the Declaration of Rights in the Constitution of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts:

No man, nor corporation, or association of men, have any other title to obtain advantages, or particular and exclusive privileges, distinct from those of the community, than what arises from the consideration of services rendered to the public; and this title being in nature neither hereditary, nor transmissible to children, or descendants, or relations by blood, the idea of a man born a magistrate, lawgiver, or judge, is absurd and unnatural.

The term "rule of law" was popularised by British jurist A. V. Dicey, who viewed the rule of law in common law systems as comprising three principles. First, that government must follow the law that it makes; second, that no one is exempt from the operation of the law and that it applies equally to all; and third, that general rights emerge from particular cases decided by the courts.

The influence of Britain, France and the United States contributed to spreading the principle of the rule of law to other countries around the world.

Legal theory and philosophy

The Oxford English Dictionary has defined rule of law as:

The authority and influence of law in society, esp. when viewed as a constraint on individual and institutional behaviour; (hence) the principle whereby all members of a society (including those in government) are considered equally subject to publicly disclosed legal codes and processes.

Despite wide use by politicians, judges and academics, the rule of law has been described as "an exceedingly elusive notion". In modern legal theory, there are at least two principal conceptions of the rule of law: a formalist or "thin" definition, and a substantive or "thick" definition. Formalist definitions of the rule of law do not make a judgment about the justness of law itself, but define specific procedural attributes that a legal framework must have in order to be in compliance with the rule of law. Substantive conceptions of the rule of law go beyond this and include certain substantive rights that are said to be based on, or derived from, the rule of law. One occasionally encounters a third "functional" conception.

The functional interpretation of the term rule of law contrasts the rule of law with the rule of man. According to the functional view, a society in which government officers have a great deal of discretion has a low degree of "rule of law", whereas a society in which government officers have little discretion has a high degree of "rule of law". Upholding the rule of law can sometimes require the punishment of those who commit offenses that are justifiable under natural law but not statutory law. The rule of law is thus somewhat at odds with flexibility, even when flexibility may be preferable.

Formalist conception

Formalist theorists claim that the rule of law requires procedural generality (general rules that apply to classes of persons and behaviors as opposed to individuals), publicity (no secret laws), prospective application (little or no retroactive laws), consistency (no contradictory laws), equality (applied equally throughout all society), and certainty (certainty of application for a given situation), but that there are no requirements with regard to the substantive content of the law. Formalists include A. V. Dicey, F. A. Hayek, Joseph Raz, and Joseph Unger.

British constitutional theorist Albert Venn Dicey is often associated with the thin conception of the rule of law

According to Dicey, the rule of law in the United Kingdom has three dominant characteristics: First, the absolute supremacy of regular law – a person is to be judged by a fixed set of rules and punished for breaching only the law, and is not to be subject to "the exercise by persons in authority of wide, arbitrary, or discretionary powers of constraint". Second, the equality of law — "the universal subjection of all classes to one law administered by the ordinary Courts". Third, the fact that, in the United Kingdom, the constitution is the result of the common law, being not the source but the consequence of citizens' rights.

A 1977 article by Joseph Raz argued that the rule of law means that people should obey the law and be ruled by it. Construed more narrowly, the rule of law would also mean that the government should be ruled by and subjected to the law. Following from Raz's general conception of the rule of law, he argued for the existence of two groups of principles of the rule of law: First, that the law is capable of guiding the behaviour of its subjects; second, that there exists an effective legal machinery that secures actual compliance with the rule of law. The first group comprises principles such as the accessibility, clarity, and prospective nature of the law; the stability of the law; and the compliance of lawmaking with "open, stable, clear and general rules" that create a stable framework, with such rules empowering authorities to make orders and providing guidelines for the exercise of such powers. The second group includes principles including judicial independence, natural justice, judicial review, and limited administrative discretion.

Joseph Raz in February 2009. He stated in a 1977 article that the rule of law requires that "the making of particular laws should be guided by open and relatively stable general rules"

In Raz's view, one of the virtues of the rule of law is the restraint it imposes on authorities. It aims to exclude arbitrary power, as most of the exercises of arbitrary power violate the rule of law. Arbitrary power is excluded when courts hold themselves accountable only to the law and observe "fairly strict procedures". Another virtue is the protection it accords to individual freedom, namely, "the sense of freedom in which it is identified with an effective ability to choose between as many options as possible". Most importantly, to adhere to the rule of law is to respect human dignity by "treating humans as persons capable of planning and plotting their future".

Raz also identified some of the potential pitfalls of the rule of law. He opined that as the rule of law is designed "to minimise the harm to freedom and dignity which the law may cause in its pursuit of its goals however laudable these may be", the strict pursuit of the rule of law may prevent one from achieving certain social goals which may be preferable to the rule of law: "Sacrificing too many social goals on the altar of the rule of law may make the law barren and empty".

Substantive conception

Substantive theorists believe that the rule of law necessarily entails protection of individual rights. Some substantive theorists believe that democracy is part of the rule of law. Substantivists include Ronald Dworkin, Sir John Laws, Lon Fuller, and Trevor Allan, holding that the rule of law intrinsically protects some or all individual rights.

Ronald Dworkin in September 2008. Dworkin's conception of the rule of law is "thick", as it encompasses a substantive theory of law and adjudication.

Ronald Dworkin defines what he terms the "rights conception" of the rule of law as follows:

It assumes that citizens have moral rights and duties with respect to one another, and political rights against the state as a whole. It insists that these moral and political rights be recognized in positive law, so that they may be enforced upon the demand of individual citizens through courts or other judicial institutions of the familiar type, so far as this is practicable. The rule of law on this conception is the ideal of rule by an accurate public conception of individual rights. It does not distinguish, as the rule book conception does, between the rule of law and substantive justice; on the contrary it requires, as part of the ideal of law, that the rules in the book capture and enforce moral rights.

Paul Craig, in analysing Dworkin's view, drew three conclusions. First, Dworkin rejects the need to distinguish between "legal" rules and a more complete political philosophy, since the rule of law is basically the theory of law and adjudication that he believes is correct. Secondly, the rule of law is not simply the thin or formal rule of law; the latter forms part of Dworkin's theory of law and adjudication. Thirdly, since taking a substantive view of the rule of law requires choosing what the best theory of justice is, it is necessary to articulate particular conceptions of what liberty, equality and other freedoms require.

Social science analyses

Economics

Economists and lawyers have studied and analysed the rule of law's impact on economic development. In particular, a major question in the area of law and economics is whether the rule of law matters to economic development, particularly in developing nations. The economist F. A. Hayek analyzed how the rule of law might be beneficial to the free market. Hayek proposed that under the rule of law, individuals would be able to make wise investments and future plans with some confidence in a successful return on investment when he stated: "under the Rule of Law the government is prevented from stultifying individual efforts by ad hoc action. Within the known rules of the game the individual is free to pursue his personal ends and desires, certain that the powers of government will not be used deliberately to frustrate his efforts."

Studies have shown that weak rule of law (for example, discretionary regulatory enforcement) discourages investment. Economists have found, for example, that a rise in discretionary regulatory enforcement caused US firms to abandon international investments.

Constitutional economics is the study of the compatibility of economic and financial decisions within existing constitutional law frameworks. Aspects of constitutional frameworks relevant to both the rule of law and public economics include government spending on the judiciary, which, in many transitional and developing countries, is completely controlled by the executive. Additionally, judicial corruption may arise from both the executive branch and private actors. Standards of constitutional economics such as transparency can also be used during annual budget processes for the benefit of the rule of law. Further, the availability of an effective court system in situations of unfair government spending and executive impoundment of previously authorized appropriations is a key element for the success of the rule of law.

Comparative approaches

The term "rule of law" has been used primarily in the English-speaking countries, and it is not yet fully clarified with regard to such well-established democracies such as Sweden, Denmark, France, Germany, or Japan. A common language between lawyers of common law and civil law countries is critically important for research of links between the rule of law and real economy.

The rule of law can be hampered when there is a disconnect between legal and popular consensus. For example, under the auspices of the World Intellectual Property Organization, nominally strong copyright laws have been implemented throughout most of the world; but because the attitude of much of the population does not conform to these laws, a rebellion against ownership rights has manifested in rampant piracy, including an increase in peer-to-peer file sharing. Similarly, in Russia, tax evasion is common and a person who admits he does not pay taxes is not judged or criticized by his colleagues and friends, because the tax system is viewed as unreasonable. Bribery likewise has different normative implications across cultures.

Education

UNESCO has argued that education has an important role in promoting the rule of law and a culture of lawfulness, providing an important protective function by strengthening learners' abilities to face and overcome difficult life situations. Young people can be important contributors to a culture of lawfulness, and governments can provide educational support that nurtures positive values and attitudes in future generations. A movement towards education for justice seeks to promote the rule of law in schools.

Status in various jurisdictions

Countries by adherence to the Rule of Law according to the 2017–18 World Justice Project report

The rule of law has been considered one of the key dimensions that determine the quality and good governance of a country. Research, like the Worldwide Governance Indicators, defines the rule of law as "the extent to which agents have confidence and abide by the rules of society, and in particular the quality of contract enforcement, the police and the courts, as well as the likelihood of crime or violence." Based on this definition the Worldwide Governance Indicators project has developed aggregate measurements for the rule of law in more than 200 countries, as seen in the map at right. Other evaluations such as the World Justice Project Rule of Law Index show that adherence to rule of law fell in 61% of countries in 2022. Globally, this means that 4.4 billion people live in countries where rule of law declined in 2021.

Europe

The preamble of the rule of law European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms says "the governments of European countries which are like-minded and have a common heritage of political traditions, ideals, freedom and the rule of law".

In France and Germany the concepts of rule of law (Etat de droit and Rechtsstaat respectively) are analogous to the principles of constitutional supremacy and protection of fundamental rights from public authorities, particularly the legislature. France was one of the early pioneers of the ideas of the rule of law. The German interpretation is more rigid but similar to that of France and the United Kingdom.

United Kingdom

Main article: Rule of law in the United Kingdom See also: History of the constitution of the United Kingdom

In the United Kingdom the rule of law is a long-standing principle of the way the country is governed, dating from England's Magna Carta in 1215 and the Bill of Rights 1689. In the 19th century classic work Introduction to the Study of the Law of the Constitution (1885), A. V. Dicey, a constitutional scholar and lawyer, wrote of the twin pillars of the British constitution: the rule of law and parliamentary sovereignty.

Americas

United States

Constitutional law
of the United States
Overview
Principles
Government structure
Individual rights
Theory

All government officers of the United States, including the President, Justices of the Supreme Court, state judges and legislators, and all members of Congress, pledge first and foremost to uphold the Constitution, affirming that the rule of law is superior to the rule of any human leader. At the same time, the federal government has considerable discretion: the legislative branch is free to decide what statutes it will write, as long as it stays within its enumerated powers and respects the constitutionally protected rights of individuals. Likewise, the judicial branch has a degree of judicial discretion, and the executive branch also has various discretionary powers including prosecutorial discretion.

James Wilson said during the Philadelphia Convention in 1787 that, "Laws may be unjust, may be unwise, may be dangerous, may be destructive; and yet not be so unconstitutional as to justify the Judges in refusing to give them effect." George Mason agreed that judges "could declare an unconstitutional law void. But with regard to every law, however unjust, oppressive or pernicious, which did not come plainly under this description, they would be under the necessity as judges to give it a free course." Chief Justice John Marshall a similar position in 1827: "When its existence as law is denied, that existence cannot be proved by showing what are the qualities of a law."

Scholars continue to debate whether the U.S. Constitution adopted a particular interpretation of the "rule of law", and if so, which one. For example, John Harrison asserts that the word "law" in the Constitution is simply defined as that which is legally binding, rather than being "defined by formal or substantive criteria", and therefore judges do not have discretion to decide that laws fail to satisfy such unwritten and vague criteria. Law professor Frederick Mark Gedicks disagrees, writing that Cicero, Augustine, Thomas Aquinas, and the framers of the U.S. Constitution believed that an unjust law was not really a law at all.

Some modern scholars contend that the rule of law has been corroded during the past century by the instrumental view of law promoted by legal realists such as Oliver Wendell Holmes and Roscoe Pound. For example, Brian Tamanaha asserts: "The rule of law is a centuries-old ideal, but the notion that law is a means to an end became entrenched only in the course of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries."

Others argue that the rule of law has survived but was transformed to allow for the exercise of discretion by administrators. For much of American history, the dominant notion of the rule of law in administrative law has been some version of Dicey's, that is, individuals should be able to challenge an administrative order by bringing suit in a court of general jurisdiction. The increased number of administrative cases led to fears that excess judicial oversight over administrative decisions would overwhelm the courts and destroy the advantages of specialization that led to the creation of administrative agencies in the first place. By 1941, a compromise had emerged. If administrators adopted procedures that more or less tracked "the ordinary legal manner" of the courts, further review of the facts by "the ordinary Courts of the land" was unnecessary. Thus Dicey's rule of law was recast into a purely procedural form.

On July 1, 2024, in Trump v. United States, the Supreme Court held that presidents have absolute immunity for acts committed as president within their core constitutional purview, at least presumptive immunity for official acts within the outer perimeter of their official responsibility, and no immunity for unofficial acts. Legal scholars have warned of the negative impact of this decision on the status of rule of law in the United States. Prior to that, in 1973 and 2000 the Office of Legal Counsel within the Department of Justice issued opinions saying that a sitting president cannot be indicted or prosecuted, but it is constitutional to indict and try a former president for the same offenses for which the President was impeached by the House of Representatives and acquitted by the Senate under the Impeachment Disqualification Clause of Article I, Section III.

Numerous definitions of "rule of law" are used in United States governmental bodies. An organization's definition might depend on that organization's goal. For instance, military occupation or counterinsurgency campaigns may necessitate prioritising physical security over human rights. U.S. Army doctrine and U.S. Government (USG) interagency agreements might see the rule of law as a principle of governance: Outlines of different definitions are given in a JAG Corps handbook for judge advocates deployed with the US Army.

Canada

In Canada, the rule of law is associated with A.V. Dicey's view. It is mentioned in the preamble to the Constitution Act, 1982. The Constitution of Canada is "similar in principle" to the British constitution, and includes unwritten constitutional principles of democracy, judicial independence, federalism, constitutionalism and the rule of law, and the protection of minorities.

In 1959, Roncarelli v Duplessis, the Supreme Court of Canada called the Rule of Law a "fundamental postulate" of the Canadian Constitution. According to Reference Re Secession of Quebec, it encompasses, "a sense of orderliness, of subjection to known legal rules and of executive accountability to legal authority." In Canadian law, it means that the relationship between the state and the individual must be regulated by law and that the Constitution binds all governments, both federal and provincial, including the executive. With the adoption of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, the Canadian system of government was transformed to a significant extent from a system of Parliamentary supremacy to one of constitutional supremacy. The principle of the rule of law and constitutionalism is aided by acknowledging that the constitution is entrenched beyond simple majority rule. However, the notwithstanding clause operates to provide a limited "legislative override" of certain fundamental freedoms contained in the Charter, and has been invoked at different times by provincial legislatures.

In Canadian administrative law, "all exercises of public authority must find their source in law. All decision-making powers have legal limits, derived from the enabling statute itself, the common or civil law or the Constitution. Judicial review is the means by which the courts supervise those who exercise statutory powers, to ensure that they do not overstep their legal authority. The function of judicial review is therefore to ensure the legality, the reasonableness and the fairness of the administrative process and its outcomes." Administrative decision makers must adopt a culture of justification and demonstrate that their exercise of delegated public power can be “justified to citizens in terms of rationality and fairness.”

Asia

East Asian cultures are influenced by two schools of thought, Confucianism, which advocated good governance as rule by leaders who are benevolent and virtuous, and legalism, which advocated strict adherence to law. The influence of one school of thought over the other has varied throughout the centuries. One study indicates that throughout East Asia, only South Korea, Singapore, Japan, Taiwan and Hong Kong have societies that are robustly committed to a law-bound state. According to Awzar Thi, a member of the Asian Human Rights Commission, the rule of law in Cambodia and most of Asia is weak or nonexistent:

Apart from a number of states and territories, across the continent there is a huge gulf between the rule of law rhetoric and reality. In Thailand, the police force is favor over the rich and corrupted. In Cambodia, judges are proxies for the ruling political party ... That a judge may harbor political prejudice or apply the law unevenly are the smallest worries for an ordinary criminal defendant in Asia. More likely ones are: Will the police fabricate the evidence? Will the prosecutor bother to show up? Will the judge fall asleep? Will I be poisoned in prison? Will my case be completed within a decade?

In countries such as China and Vietnam, the transition to a market economy has been a major factor in a move toward the rule of law, because the rule of law is important to foreign investors and to economic development. It remains unclear whether the rule of law in countries like China and Vietnam will be limited to commercial matters or will spill into other areas as well, and if so whether that spillover will enhance prospects for related values such as democracy and human rights.

China

See also: Chinese law § Rule of law, and Three Supremes

In China, the phrase fǎzhì (法治), which can be translated as "rule of law," means using the law as an instrument to facilitate social control.

Late Qing dynasty legal reforms unsuccessfully sought to implement Western legal principles including the rule of law and judicial independence. Judicial independence further decreased in the Republic of China under Chiang Kai-shek per the Kuomintang's policy of particization (danghua), under which administrative judges were required to have "deep comprehension" of the KMT's principles.

After China's reform and opening-up, the Communist Party emphasized the rule of law as a basic strategy and method for state management of society. Jiang Zemin first called for establishing a socialist rule of law at the Fifteenth Party Congress in 1997. Despite the CCP's Document 9 arguing that Western values have corrupted many people's understanding of the rule of law, the CCP has simultaneously endorsed governing the country in accordance with the rule of law. These factors likely suggest that the CCP is creating a rule of law with Chinese characteristics, which may simply entail modifying the Western notion of rule of law to best match China's unique political, social, and historical conditions. As Document 9 suggests, the CCP does not see judicial independence, separation of power, or constitutional forms of governance as defined by Western society, as suiting China's unique form of governance. This unique version of the rule of law with Chinese characteristics has led to different attempts to define China's method of governing the country by rule of law domestically and internationally.

In his writings on socialist rule of law in China, Xi Jinping has emphasized traditional Chinese concepts including people as the root of the state (mingben), "the ideal of no lawsuit" (tianxia wusong), "respecting rite and stressing law" (longli zhongfa), "virtue first, penalty second" (dezhu xingfu), and "promoting virtue and being prudent in punishment" (mingde shenfa). Xi states that the two fundamental aspects of the socialist rule of law are: that the political and legal organs (including courts, the police, and the procuratorate) must believe in the law and uphold the law; and all political and legal officials must follow the Communist Party.

India

The Constitution of India is intended to limit opportunities for governmental discretion, and the judiciary uses judicial review to uphold the Constitution, especially the Fundamental Rights. Although some people have criticized the Indian judiciary for its judicial activism, others believe such actions are needed to safeguard the rule of law based on the Constitution as well as to preserve judicial independence, an important part of the basic structure doctrine.

Japan

Japan had centuries of tradition prior to World War II, during which there were laws, but they did not provide a central organizing principle for society, and they did not constrain the powers of government. As the 21st century began, the percentage of people who were lawyers and judges in Japan remained very low relative to western Europe and the United States, and legislation in Japan tended to be terse and general, leaving much discretion in the hands of bureaucrats.

Singapore

Main article: Rule of law doctrine in Singapore

Organisations

This section has multiple issues. Please help improve it or discuss these issues on the talk page. (Learn how and when to remove these messages)
This section relies largely or entirely upon a single source. Relevant discussion may be found on the talk page. Please help improve this article by introducing citations to additional sources at this section. (October 2023) (Learn how and when to remove this message)
This section may rely excessively on sources too closely associated with the subject, potentially preventing the article from being verifiable and neutral. Please help improve it by replacing them with more appropriate citations to reliable, independent, third-party sources. (October 2023) (Learn how and when to remove this message)
(Learn how and when to remove this message)

Various organizations are involved in promoting the rule of law.

EU Commission

Further information: Category:Rule of law missions of the European Union

The rule of law is enshrined in Article 2 of the Treaty on European Union as one of the common values for all Member States. Under the rule of law, all public powers always act within the constraints set out by law, in accordance with the values of democracy and fundamental rights, and under the control of independent and impartial courts. The rule of law includes principles such as legality, implying a transparent, accountable, democratic and pluralistic process for enacting laws; legal certainty; prohibiting the arbitrary exercise of executive power; effective judicial protection by independent and impartial courts, effective judicial review including respect for fundamental rights; separation of powers; and equality before the law. These principles have been recognised by the European Court of Justice and the European Court of Human Rights. In addition, the Council of Europe has developed standards and issued opinions and recommendations which provide well-established guidance to promote and uphold the rule of law.

The Council of Europe

The Statute of the Council of Europe characterizes the rule of law as one of the core principles which the establishment of the organization based on. The paragraph 3 of the preamble of the Statute of the Council of Europe states: "Reaffirming their devotion to the spiritual and moral values which are the common heritage of their peoples and the true source of individual freedom, political liberty and the rule of law, principles which form the basis of all genuine democracy." The Statute lays the compliance with the rule of law principles as a condition for the European states to be a full member of the organization.

International Commission of Jurists

In 1959, an event took place in New Delhi and speaking as the International Commission of Jurists, made a declaration as to the fundamental principle of the rule of law. The event consisted of over 185 judges, lawyers, and law professors from 53 countries. This later became known as the Declaration of Delhi. During the declaration they declared that the rule of law implied certain rights and freedoms, an independent judiciary, and social, economic and cultural conditions conducive to human dignity. One aspect not included in The Declaration of Delhi was for rule of law requiring legislative power to be subject to judicial review.

United Nations

The Secretary-General of the United Nations defines the rule of law as:

a principle of governance in which all persons, institutions and entities, public and private, including the State itself, are accountable to laws that are publicly promulgated, equally enforced and independently adjudicated, and which are consistent with international human rights norms and standards. It requires, as well, measures to ensure adherence to the principles of supremacy of law, equality before the law, accountability to the law, fairness in the application of the law, separation of powers, participation in decision-making, legal certainty, avoidance of arbitrariness and procedural and legal transparency.

The General Assembly has considered rule of law an agenda item since 1992, with renewed interest since 2006 and has adopted resolutions at its last three sessions. The Security Council has held a number of thematic debates on the rule of law, and adopted resolutions emphasizing the importance of these issues in the context of women, peace and security, children in armed conflict, and the protection of civilians in armed conflict. The Peacebuilding Commission has also regularly addressed rule of law issues with respect to countries on its agenda. The Vienna Declaration and Programme of Action also requires the rule of law be included in human rights education. Additionally, the Sustainable Development Goal 16, a component of the 2030 Agenda is aimed at promoting the rule of law at national and international levels.

In Our Common Agenda, the United Nations Secretary General wrote in paragraph 23: "In support of efforts to put people at the center of justice systems, I will promote a new vision for the rule of law, building on Sustainable Development Goal 16 and the 2012 Declaration of the High-level Meeting of the General Assembly on the Rule of Law at the National and International Levels."

International Bar Association

The Council of the International Bar Association passed a resolution in 2009 endorsing a substantive or "thick" definition of the rule of law:

An independent, impartial judiciary; the presumption of innocence; the right to a fair and public trial without undue delay; a rational and proportionate approach to punishment; a strong and independent legal profession; strict protection of confidential communications between lawyer and client; equality of all before the law; these are all fundamental principles of the Rule of Law. Accordingly, arbitrary arrests; secret trials; indefinite detention without trial; cruel or degrading treatment or punishment; intimidation or corruption in the electoral process, are all unacceptable. The Rule of Law is the foundation of a civilised society. It establishes a transparent process accessible and equal to all. It ensures adherence to principles that both liberate and protect. The IBA calls upon all countries to respect these fundamental principles. It also calls upon its members to speak out in support of the Rule of Law within their respective communities.

World Justice Project

"With law shall land be built", the preface of Codex Holmiensis above Copenhagen Court House. In 2023, the WJP ranked Denmark no. 1 on the their Rule of Law Index

The World Justice Project (WJP) is an international organization that produces independent research and data, in order to build awareness, and stimulate action to advance the rule of law.

The World Justice Project defines the rule of law as a durable system of laws, institutions, norms, and country commitment that uphold four universal principles:

  1. Accountability: the government and its officials and agents are accountable under the law.
  2. Just Law: the law is clear, publicized, and stable, and is applied evenly. It ensures human rights as well as properly, contract, and procedural rights.
  3. Open Government: the processes enforced are accessible, fair, and efficient.
  4. Accessible and Impartial Justice: justice is delivered timely by competent, ethical, and independent representatives and neutrals who are accessible, have adequate resources, and reflect the makeup of the communities they serve.

Their flagship WJP Rule of Law Index, measures the extent to which 140 countries and jurisdictions adhere to the rule of law across eight dimensions: Constraints on Government Powers, Absence of Corruption, Open Government, Fundamental Rights, Order and Security, Regulatory Enforcement, Civil Justice, and Criminal Justice.

International Development Law Organization

The International Development Law Organization (IDLO) is an intergovernmental organization with a joint focus on the promotion of rule of law and development. It works to empower people and communities to claim their rights, and provides governments with the know-how to realize them. It supports emerging economies and middle-income countries to strengthen their legal capacity and rule of law framework for sustainable development and economic opportunity. It is the only intergovernmental organization with an exclusive mandate to promote the rule of law and has experience working in more than 90 countries around the world.

The International Development Law Organization has a holistic definition of the rule of law:

More than a matter of due process, the rule of law is an enabler of justice and development. The three notions are interdependent; when realized, they are mutually reinforcing. For IDLO, as much as a question of laws and procedure, the rule of law is a culture and daily practice. It is inseparable from equality, from access to justice and education, from access to health and the protection of the most vulnerable. It is crucial for the viability of communities and nations, and for the environment that sustains them.

International Network to Promote the Rule of Law

The International Network to Promote the Rule of Law is an international network of law practitioners working on rule of law issues in post-conflict and developing countries from a policy, practice and research perspective. INPROL is based at the US Institute of Peace in partnership with the US Department of State Bureau of International Narcotics and Law Enforcement, the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe Strategic Police Matters Unit, the Center of Excellence for Police Stability Unit, and William and Mary School of Law in the United States.

See also

Legal scholars

Sources

 This article incorporates text from a free content work. Licensed under CC BY-SA (license statement/permission). Text taken from Strengthening the rule of law through education: A guide for policymakers​, 63, UNESCO.

Notes and references

  1. Cole, John et al. (1997). The Library of Congress, W. W. Norton & Company. p. 113
  2. Sempill, Julian (2020). "The Rule of Law and the Rule of Men: History, Legacy, Obscurity". Hague Journal on the Rule of Law. 12 (3): 511–540. doi:10.1007/s40803-020-00149-9. S2CID 256425870.
  3. "Rule of Law". National Geographic Society. 15 March 2019. Retrieved 29 January 2022.
  4. Hobson, Charles. The Great Chief Justice: John Marshall and the Rule of Law, p. 57 (University Press of Kansas, 1996): according to John Marshall, "the framers of the Constitution contemplated that instrument as a rule for the government of courts, as well as of the legislature."
  5. "rule of law | Definition, Implications, Significance, & Facts | Britannica". Encyclopædia Britannica. Retrieved 29 January 2022.
  6. ^ Rutherford, Samuel. Lex, rex: the law and the prince, a dispute for the just prerogative of king and people, containing the reasons and causes of the defensive wars of the kingdom of Scotland, and of their expedition for the ayd and help of their brethren of England, p. 237 (1644): "The prince remaineth, even being a prince, a social creature, a man, as well as a king; one who must buy, sell, promise, contract, dispose: ergo, he is not regula regulans, but under rule of law ..."
  7. Ten, C. l (2017), "Constitutionalism and the Rule of Law", A Companion to Contemporary Political Philosophy, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd, pp. 493–502, doi:10.1002/9781405177245.ch22, ISBN 978-1405177245
  8. Reynolds, Noel B. (1986). "Constitutionalism and the Rule of Law". All Faculty Publications (BYU ScholarsArchive). Archived from the original on 2019-11-07. Retrieved 2020-02-21.
  9. "Constitutionalism, Rule of Law, PS201H-2B3". www.proconservative.net. Archived from the original on 15 March 2018. Retrieved 12 November 2019.
  10. Paul. "Resisting the Rule of Men." . Louis ULJ 62 (2017): 333. "I will say that we have "the rule of men" or "personal rule" when those who wield the power of the state are not obliged to give reasons to those over whom that power is being wielded—from the standpoint of the ruled, the rulers may simply act on their brute desires."
  11. ^ Wormuth, Francis. The Origins of Modern Constitutionalism, p. 28 (1949).
  12. Bingham, Thomas. The Rule of Law, p. 3 (Penguin 2010).
  13. Black, Anthony. A World History of Ancient Political Thought (Oxford University Press 2009). ISBN 0-19-928169-6
  14. Austin, Christopher R. (2019). Pradyumna: Lover, Magician, and Son of the Avatara. Oxford University Press. p. 21. ISBN 978-0-19-005411-3. Archived from the original on 7 September 2023. Retrieved 11 January 2020.
  15. Brockington (1998, p. 26)
  16. Buitenen (1973) pp. xxiv–xxv
  17. Cowell, Herbert (1872). History and Constitution of the Courts and Legislative Authorities in India. Michigan: University of Michigan Press. pp. 37–56. ISBN 1278155406.
  18. Giri, Ananta Kumar (5 November 2001). "1". Rule of Law and Indian Society: Colonial Encounters,post-colonial experiments and beyond (PDF) (PhD thesis). Madras Institute of Development Studies. Retrieved 28 June 2024.
  19. "The Indian Judicial System | A Historical Survey". Allahabad High Court. Retrieved 2023-02-08.
  20. Giri, Ananta Kumar (5 November 2001). "1". Rule of Law and Indian Society: Colonial Encounters,post-colonial experiments and beyond (PDF) (PhD thesis). Madras Institute of Development Studies. Retrieved 28 June 2024.
  21. Ostwald, Martin (1986). From popular sovereignty to the sovereignty of law : law, society, and politics in fifth-century Athens. Berkeley: University of California Press. pp. 412–496. ISBN 9780520067981.
  22. Ober, Josiah (1989). Mass and elite in democratic Athens : rhetoric, ideology, and the power of the people. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press. pp. 144–7, 299–300. ISBN 9780691028644.
  23. Liddel, Peter P. (2007). Civic obligation and individual liberty in ancient Athens. Oxford: Oxford University Press. pp. 130–131. ISBN 978-0-19-922658-0.
  24. ^ Aristotle, Politics 3.16
  25. ^ David Clarke, "The many meanings of the rule of law Archived 2016-04-08 at the Wayback Machine" in Kanishka Jayasuriya, ed., Law, Capitalism and Power in Asia (New York: Routledge, 1998).
  26. Cooper, John et al. Complete Works By Plato, p. 1402 (Hackett Publishing, 1997).
  27. In full: "The magistrates who administer the law, the judges who act as its spokesmen, all the rest of us who live as its servants, grant it our allegiance as a guarantee of our freedom."—Cicero (1975). Murder Trials. Penguin Classics. Translated by Michael Grant. Harmondsworth: Penguin. p. 217. Original Latin: "Legum ministri magistratus, legum interpretes iudices, legum denique idcirco omnes servi sumus ut liberi esse possimus."—"Pro Cluentio". The Latin Library. 53:146. Retrieved 5 March 2018.
  28. Xiangming, Zhang. On Two Ancient Chinese Administrative Ideas: Rule of Virtue and Rule by Law Archived 17 June 2017 at the Wayback Machine, The Culture Mandala: Bulletin of the Centre for East-West Cultural and Economic Studies (2002): "Although Han Fei recommended that the government should rule by law, which seems impartial, he advocated that the law be enacted by the lords solely. The lords place themselves above the law. The law is thereby a monarchical means to control the people, not the people's means to restrain the lords. The lords are by no means on an equal footing with the people. Hence we cannot mention the rule by law proposed by Han Fei in the same breath as democracy and the rule of law advocated today."
    Bevir, Mark. The Encyclopedia of Political Theory, pp. 161–162.
    Munro, Donald. The Concept of Man in Early China. p. 4.
    Guo, Xuezhi. The Ideal Chinese Political Leader: A Historical and Cultural Perspective. p. 152.
  29. Peerenboom, Randall (1993). Law and morality in ancient China: the silk manuscripts of Huang-Lao. SUNY Press. p. 171. ISBN 978-0-7914-1237-4.
  30. Tamanaha, Brian (2004). On the Rule of Law. Cambridge University Press. p. 3
  31. Alter, Robert (2004). The Five Books of Moses: A Translation with Commentary. W.W. Norton & Company. p. 627. ISBN 978-0-393-01955-1.
  32. Magna Carta (1215) translation, British Library
  33. Magna Carta (1297) U.S. National Archives Archived 2016-10-07 at the Wayback Machine.
  34. Turner, Ralph (2016). Magna Carta. Routledge.
  35. Oxford English Dictionary (OED), "Rule of Law, n.", accessed 27 April 2013. According to the OED, this sentence from about 1500 was written by John Blount: "Lawes And constitutcions be ordeyned be cause the noysome Appetit of man maye be kepte vnder the Rewle of lawe by the wiche mankinde ys dewly enformed to lyue honestly." And this sentence from 1559 is attributed to William Bavand: "A Magistrate should..kepe rekenyng of all mennes behauiours, and to be carefull, least thei despisyng the rule of lawe, growe to a wilfulnes."
  36. Hallam, Henry. The Constitutional History of England, vol. 1, p. 441 (1827).
  37. Ferro, Víctor: El Dret Públic Català. Les Institucions a Catalunya fins al Decret de Nova Planta; Eumo Editorial; ISBN 84-7602-203-4
  38. ^ "The Rule of Law". The Constitution Society. Archived from the original on 6 October 2014. Retrieved 3 October 2014.
  39. Harrington, James (1747). Toland, John (ed.). The Oceana and other works (3 ed.). London: Millar. p. 37 (Internet Archive: copy possessed by John Adams).
  40. Locke, John. Second Treatise of Civil Government, Ch. IV, sec. 22 (1690).
  41. Tamanaha, Brian. On the Rule of Law, p. 47 (Cambridge University Press, 2004).
  42. Peacock, Anthony Arthur, Freedom and the rule of law, p. 24. 2010.
  43. Lieberman, Jethro. A Practical Companion to the Constitution, p. 436 (University of California Press 2005).
  44. Constitution of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts (1780), Part the First, Art. VI.
  45. Albert Venn Dicey, Introduction to the Study of the Law of the Constitution, 5th ed (London: Macmillan and Co, 1897) at 175-84, cited in "Rule of Law", Centre for Constitutional Studies, July 4, 2019
  46. Winks, Robin W. (1993). World civilization: a brief history (2nd ed.). San Diego, CA: Collegiate Press. p. 406. ISBN 978-0-939693-28-3.
  47. Billias, George Athan (2011). American constitutionalism heard round the world, 1776–1989: a global perspective. New York: New York University Press. pp. 53–56. ISBN 978-0-8147-2517-7.
  48. Oxford English Dictionary online (accessed 13 September 2018; spelling Americanized). The phrase "the rule of law" is also sometimes used in other senses. See Garner, Bryan A. (Editor in Chief). Black's Law Dictionary, 9th Edition, p. 1448. (Thomson Reuters, 2009). ISBN 978-0-314-26578-4. Black's provides five definitions of "rule of law": the lead definition is "A substantive legal principle"; the second is the "supremacy of regular as opposed to arbitrary power".
  49. Tamanaha, Brian Z. (2004). On the Rule of Law. Cambridge University Press. p. 3.
  50. Craig, Paul P. (1997). "Formal and Substantive Conceptions of the Rule of Law: An Analytical Framework". Public Law: 467.
  51. ^ Tamanaha, Brian. "The Rule of Law for Everyone?", Current Legal Problems, vol. 55, via SSRN (2002).
  52. ^ Stephenson, Matthew. "Rule of Law as a Goal of Development Policy", World Bank Research (2008).
  53. Heidi M. Hurd (Aug 1992). "Justifiably Punishing the Justified". Michigan Law Review. 90 (8): 2203–2324. doi:10.2307/1289573. JSTOR 1289573.
  54. Donelson, Raff (2019). "Legal Inconsistencies". Tulsa Law Review. 55 (1): 15–44. SSRN 3365259.
  55. Ronald M. Dworkin (1985), A Matter of Principle, Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, p. 11, ISBN 978-0-674-55461-0.
  56. A V Dicey (1927) , "The Rule of Law: Its Nature and General Applications", An Introduction to the Study of the Law of the Constitution (8th ed.), London: Macmillan & Co., pp. 179–201 at 198–199, OCLC 5755153; see also A V Dicey (1959), An Introduction to the Study of the Law of the Constitution (10th ed.), London: Macmillan & Co., p. 202, ISBN 978-1-4212-9044-7.
  57. Dicey (8th ed.), pp. 183–184.
  58. See also Dicey (8th ed.), p. 189.
  59. See also Dicey (8th ed.), p. 191.
  60. Joseph Raz (1977), "The Rule of Law and Its Virtue", Law Quarterly Review, 93: 195–211 at 196 and 198.
  61. Raz, p. 202.
  62. Raz, pp. 198–199.
  63. Raz, p. 199.
  64. ^ Raz, pp. 199–200.
  65. Raz, pp. 200–201.
  66. ^ Raz, p. 201.
  67. Raz, pp. 201–202.
  68. Raz, pp. 202–204.
  69. Raz, p. 211.
  70. Dworkin, pp. 11–12.
  71. Paul Craig (1997), "Formal and Substantive Conceptions of the Rule of Law: An Analytical Framework", Public Law: 467–487 at 478.
  72. Luis Flores Ballesteros. "Corruption and development. Does the 'rule of law' factor weigh more than we think?" 54 Pesos May. 2008:54 Pesos 15 November 2008.
  73. Hayek, F.A. (1994). The Road to Serfdom. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press. p. 81. ISBN 978-0-226-32061-8.
  74. Graham, Brad; Stroup, Caleb (2016). "Does Anti-bribery enforcement deter foreign investment?" (PDF). Applied Economics Letters. 23: 63–67. doi:10.1080/13504851.2015.1049333. S2CID 218640318 – via Taylor and Francis.
  75. Peter Barenboim, "Defining the rules", The European Lawyer, Issue 90, October 2009
  76. Peter Barenboim, Natalya Merkulova. "The 25th Anniversary of Constitutional Economics: The Russian Model and Legal Reform in Russia, in The World Rule of Law Movement and Russian Legal Reform" Archived 2021-02-24 at the Wayback Machine, edited by Francis Neate and Holly Nielsen, Justitsinform, Moscow (2007).
  77. Bica-Huiu, Alina, White Paper: Building a Culture of Respect for the Rule of Law, American Bar Association
  78. Pope, Ronald R. "The Rule of Law and Russian Culture – Are They Compatible?" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on 2 September 2016. Retrieved 15 April 2017.
  79. Licht, Amir N. (December 2007). "Culture rules: The foundations of the rule of law and other norms of governance" (PDF). Journal of Comparative Economics. 35 (4): 659–688. doi:10.1016/j.jce.2007.09.001. hdl:2027.42/39991.
  80. ^ UNESCO and UNODC (2019). "Strengthening the rule of lawthrough education: A guide for policymakers". Archived from the original on 2020-02-25. Retrieved 2019-05-22.
  81. ^ Kaufman, Daniel et al. "Governance Matters VI: Governance Indicators for 1996–2006, World Bank Policy Research Working Paper No. 4280" (July 2007).
  82. "Governance Matters 2008" Archived 28 March 2009 at the Wayback Machine, World Bank.
  83. "WJP Rule of Law Index". worldjusticeproject.org. Retrieved 2023-02-08.
  84. "WJP Rule of Law Index Insights". worldjusticeproject.org. Retrieved 2023-02-08.
  85. Pech, Laurent (10 September 2006). "Rule of Law in France". Middlesex University – School of Law. SSRN 929099.
  86. Letourneur, M.; Drago, R. (1958). "The Rule of Law as Understood in France". The American Journal of Comparative Law. 7 (2): 147–177. doi:10.2307/837562. JSTOR 837562.
  87. Peerenboom, Randall (2004). "Rule of Law in France". Asian discourses of rule of law : theories and implementation of rule of law in twelve Asian countries, France and the U.S. (Digital printing. ed.). RoutledgeCurzon. p. 81. ISBN 978-0-415-32612-4.
  88. Rule of Law in China: A Comparative Approach. Springer. 2014. pp. 77–78. ISBN 978-3-662-44622-5.
  89. Zurn, Michael; Nollkaemper, Andre; Peerenboom, Randy, eds. (2012). Rule of Law Dynamics: In an Era of International and Transnational Governance. Cambridge University Press. pp. 116–117. ISBN 978-1-139-51097-4.
  90. "Rule of Law". The British Library. Retrieved 3 October 2014.
  91. See also "The rule of law and the prosecutor". Attorney General's Office. 9 September 2013. Archived from the original on 24 July 2019. Retrieved 20 November 2014.
  92. Hostettler, John (2011). Champions of the rule of law. Waterside Press. p. 23. ISBN 978-1-904380-68-9.
  93. Vile, Josh (2006). A Companion to the United States Constitution and its Amendments. Greenwood Publishing Group. p. 80
  94. Osborn v. Bank of the United States, 22 U.S. 738 (1824): "When are said to exercise a discretion, it is a mere legal discretion, a discretion to be exercised in discerning the course prescribed by law; and, when that is discerned, it is the duty of the court to follow it."
  95. Snowiss, Sylvia. Judicial Review and the Law of the Constitution, pp. 41–42 (Yale University Press 1990).
  96. Ogden v. Saunders, 25 U.S. 213, 347 (1827). This was Marshall's only dissent in a constitutional case. The individualist anarchist Lysander Spooner later denounced Marshall for this part of his Ogden dissent. See Spooner, Lysander (2008). Let's Abolish Government. Ludwig Von Mises Institute. p. 87. These same issues were also discussed in an earlier U.S. Supreme Court case, Calder v. Bull, 3 U.S. 386 (1798), with Justices James Iredell and Samuel Chase taking opposite positions. See Presser, Stephen. "Symposium: Samuel Chase: In Defense of the Rule of Law and Against the Jeffersonians", Vanderbilt Law Review, vol. 62, p. 349 (March 2009).
  97. Harrison, John. "Substantive Due Process and the Constitutional Text," Virginia Law Review, vol. 83, p. 493 (1997).
  98. Gedicks, Frederick. "An Originalist Defense of Substantive Due Process: Magna Carta, Higher-Law Constitutionalism, and the Fifth Amendment", Emory Law Journal, vol. 58, pp. 585–673 (2009). See also Edlin, Douglas, "Judicial Review without a Constitution", Polity, vol. 38, pp. 345–368 (2006).
  99. Tamanaha, Brian. How an Instrumental View of Law Corrodes the Rule of Law, twelfth annual Clifford Symposium on Tort Law and Social Policy.
  100. Ernst, Daniel R. (2014). Tocqueville's Nightmare: The Administrative State Emerges in America, 1900–1940. Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-992086-0
  101. Hurley, Lawrence (July 1, 2024). "Supreme Court provides win to Trump, ruling he has immunity for many acts in election interference indictment". NBC News. Archived from the original on July 1, 2024. Retrieved July 1, 2024.
  102. Fisher, Joe (2024-07-01). "Supreme Court rules Trump has partial immunity for official acts only". United Press International. Archived from the original on 2024-07-01. Retrieved 2024-07-01.
  103. For example, Lempinen, Edward High court ruling on presidential immunity threatens the rule of law, scholars warn. Berkely News
  104. "Can a sitting U.S. president face criminal charges?". Reuters. 26 February 2019. Retrieved 8 January 2022.
  105. A Sitting President's Amenability to Indictment and Criminal Prosecution (PDF) (Report). Vol. 24, Opinions. Office of Legal Counsel. October 16, 2000. pp. 222–260. Retrieved January 4, 2024.
  106. Whether a Former President May Be Indicted and Tried for the Same Offenses for Which He Was Impeached by the House and Acquitted by the Senate (PDF) (Report). Vol. 24, Opinions. Office of Legal Counsel. August 18, 2000. pp. 110–155. Retrieved January 3, 2024.
  107. Rossiter, Clinton, ed. (2003) . The Federalist Papers. Signet Classics. p. 544. ISBN 978-0-451-52881-0.
  108. Cole, Jared P.; Garvey, Todd (December 6, 2023). Impeachment and the Constitution (Report). Congressional Research Service. pp. 14–15. Retrieved December 29, 2023.
  109. ^ US Army Rule of Law Handbook: A Practitioner’s Guide for Judge Advocates. United States Army Center for Law and Military Operations. 2010. ISSN 2328-3394. LCCN 2013230550.
  110. Reference re Secession of Quebec, 1998 CanLII 793 (SCC), 2 S.C.R. 217, at paras 44-49, see also, Toronto (City) v Ontario (Attorney General), 2021 SCC 34 at para 49
  111. Reference Re Secession of Quebec, 2 SCR 217, at paras 70-78
  112. Dunsmuir v New Brunswick, 2008 SCC 9 (CanLII), 1 SCR 190, at para 28
  113. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) v Vavilov, 2019 SCC 65, at para 14, citing the Rt. Hon. B. McLachlin, “The Roles of Administrative Tribunals and Courts in Maintaining the Rule of Law” (1998), 12 C.J.A.L.P. 171, at p. 174
  114. Chu, Yun-Han et al. How East Asians View Democracy, pp. 31–32.
  115. Thi, Awzar. "Asia needs a new rule-of-law debate" Archived 2013-05-07 at the Wayback Machine, United Press International, UPIAsia.com (2008-08-14).
  116. Peerenboom, Randall in Asian Discourses of Rule of Law, p. 39 (Routledge 2004).
  117. Linda Chelan Li, The “Rule of Law” Policy in Guangdong: Continuity or Departure? Meaning, Significance and Processes. (2000), 199-220.
  118. ^ Fang, Qiang (2024). "Understanding the Rule of Law in Xi's China". In Fang, Qiang; Li, Xiaobing (eds.). China under Xi Jinping: A New Assessment. Leiden University Press. ISBN 9789087284411. JSTOR jj.15136086.
  119. ^ Fang, Qiang (2024). "Understanding the Rule of Law in Xi's China". In Fang, Qiang; Li, Xiaobing (eds.). China under Xi Jinping: A New Assessment. Leiden University Press. ISBN 9789087284411.
  120. Wang, Zhengxu (2016). "Xi Jinping: the game changer of Chinese elite politics?". Contemporary Politics. 22 (4): 469–486. doi:10.1080/13569775.2016.1175098. S2CID 156316938. Retrieved 24 September 2023.
  121. Creemers, Rogier. "Communiqué on the Current State of the Ideological Sphere (Document No. 9)". DigiChina. Stanford University. Retrieved 24 September 2023.
  122. ^ Rudolf, Moritz (2021). "Xi Jinping Thought on the Rule of Law". SWP Comment. Stiftung Wissenschaft und Politik. doi:10.18449/2021C28. S2CID 235350466. Retrieved 24 September 2023.
  123. Chen, Wang. "Xi Jinping Thought on the Rule of Law Is a New Development and New Leap ..." CSIS Interpret: China. CSIS. Retrieved 24 September 2023.
  124. Baxi, Upendra in Asian Discourses of Rule of Law, pp. 336–337 (Routledge 2004).
  125. Robinson, Simon. "For Activist Judges, Try India", Time Magazine (8 November 2006).
  126. Staff writer (2 September 2011). "Do we need judicial activism?". Retrieved 15 January 2022.
  127. (Boadi, 2001)
  128. Green, Carl. "Japan: 'The Rule of Law Without Lawyers' Reconsidered" Archived 23 June 2008 at the Wayback Machine, Speech to the Asia Society (14 March 2001).
  129. See also Goodman, Carl F. (2008). The rule of law in Japan : a comparative analysis (2nd rev. ed.). Wolters Kluwer Law & Business. ISBN 978-90-411-2750-1.
  130. "Communication From the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions 2020 Rule of Law Report The rule of law situation in the European Union". EUR-Lex. Retrieved 3 August 2022. Text was copied from this source, which is available under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License Archived 2017-10-16 at the Wayback Machine.
  131. "Statute of the Council of Europe". Council of Europe. Archived from the original on 2019-12-30. Retrieved 2017-12-07.
  132. Goldsworthy, Jeffrey. "Legislative Sovereignty and the Rule of Law" in Tom Campbell, Keith D. Ewing and Adam Tomkins (eds), Sceptical Essays on Human Rights (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001), p. 69.
  133. What is the Rule of Law? Archived 24 September 2019 at the Wayback Machine, United Nations Rule of Law.
  134. See United Nations General Assembly Resolutions A/RES/61/39, A/RES/62/70, A/RES/63/128.
  135. See United Nations Security Council debates S/PRST/2003/15, S/PRST/2004/2, S/PRST/2004/32, S/PRST/2005/30, S/PRST/2006/28.
  136. See United Nations Security Council Resolutions 1325 and 1820.
  137. E.g. see United Nations Security Council Resolution 1612.
  138. E.g. see United Nations Security Council Resolution 1674.
  139. United Nations and the Rule of Law.
  140. Vienna Declaration and Programme of Action Part II, paragraph 79
  141. Doss, Eric. "Sustainable Development Goal 16". United Nations and the Rule of Law. Archived from the original on 20 December 2021. Retrieved 25 September 2020.
  142. "Secretary-General's report on "Our Common Agenda"". www.un.org.
  143. Resolution of the Council of the International Bar Association of October 8, 2009, on the Commentary on Rule of Law Resolution (2005) Archived February 24, 2021, at the Wayback Machine.
  144. "WJP Rule of Law Index 2023 Global Press Release". World Justice Project. 2023-10-25. Retrieved 2024-12-11.
  145. "World Justice Project | Advancing the rule of law worldwide". World Justice Project. Retrieved 2023-02-08.
  146. "WJP | Our Work". World Justice Project. Retrieved 2023-02-08.
  147. "WJP | What is Rule of Law?". World Justice Project. Retrieved 2023-02-08.
  148. "WJP | Explore the methodology, insights, dataset, and interactive data". worldjusticeproject.org. Retrieved 2023-02-08.
  149. "WJP | Download the full report". worldjusticeproject.org. Retrieved 2023-02-08.
  150. "WJP Rule of Law Index Factors". worldjusticeproject.org. Retrieved 2023-02-08.
  151. "IDLO – What We Do". idlo.int. 24 February 2014. Retrieved 7 February 2015.
  152. "IDLO Strategic Plan". Archived from the original on 8 February 2015.
  153. "About IDLO". IDLO – International Development Law Organization. 26 February 2014. Archived from the original on 2 October 2019. Retrieved 30 March 2022.
  154. "Rule of Law". IDLO – International Development Law Organization. February 24, 2014. Archived from the original on October 2, 2019. Retrieved February 15, 2022.
  155. "INPROL | Home". Archived from the original on 2 February 2017. Retrieved 9 February 2017.

Bibliography

Further reading

External links

Law
Core subjects
Disciplines
Sources of law
Law making
Legal systems
Legal theory
Jurisprudence
Legal institutions
History
Western world and culture
Foundations
History
Culture
Philosophy
Religion
Law
Contemporary
integration
Portals: Categories: