Open Access Research Article
WHY ONE SHOULD OBEY THE LAW FROM A SOCIOLOGICAL VIEWPOINT?
Published Paper
Article Details
“WHY ONE SHOULD OBEY THE LAW FROM A SOCIOLOGICAL
VIEWPOINT?”
AUTHORED BY - ARYA HARIKESH SHARMA
Affiliation: Vivekanand Education Society’s College of
Law
Course:
B.L.S., LLB (Semester X)
ABSTRACT
For India,
it is especially important for every layer or group of people to respect the
established order of the law. This is important for peace and order in our
society. The Sociological School of Jurisprudence will also help understand why
it is that way.
The paradigm emphasizes the close relationship between the law and
society, so its key concept is the law as a mirror of the community. We,
therefore, affirm society as good and in general affirmed by keeping to
law-following path. By adhering to the law, we support an environment conducive
to personal development and give expression to the feeling of being accepted
here. This perspective also recognizes that culture matters. It always leads to
the state of the Indian man.
Sticking to the law does not only mean being just, but it means
reinforcing the ties between us as citizens. It leads to trust and
collaboration. Therefore, we can become better citizens by relying on the ideas
of the Sociological School of Jurisprudence. As a result, all of us can coexist
in a more robust and thriving society.
Keywords – Law, Sociological School, Jurisprudence, Schools,
Society
INTRODUCTION
Sociological jurisprudence, a term
coined by the American jurist Roscoe Pound, encapsulates an approach to
comprehending law within contemporary societies. Pound posited that law
functions as the principal mechanism for harmonizing divergent interests.
However, Pound's insight lacked a thorough exploration of how these interests
were molded and why particular interests wielded more influence within the
legal system. Although Pound's perspective was impactful, particularly during
the Progressive era, it lacked a sociological profundity concerning the genesis
and privileging of interests within the legal framework.
Sociological jurisprudence emerged as
a consequential school of legal thought in the 20th century, with Pound as its
prominent proponent. Pound, who served as the dean of Harvard Law School from
1916 to 1936, advocated for pragmatism in law. This movement aimed to
facilitate legal reform and social advancement, albeit it did not primarily
pursue institutional changes. Instead, it concentrated on reformulating
prevailing notions about the study, interpretation, and application of law.
Despite the significance of Pound's
contributions, they were not devoid of limitations. While his concept of
sociological jurisprudence underscored the role of law in reconciling diverse
interests, it lacked a nuanced comprehension of the sociological dynamics shaping
these interests within the legal system.
MEANING OF
SOCIOLOGICAL JURISPRUDENCE
Sociological jurisprudence, as a
synthesis of different juristic thoughts, regards law as social fact. Their
main focus is on the understanding of the relationship between law and modern
social institutions, marking out significance of concentrating on social
purposes and interests served by law rather than abstract individual rights.
The legal scholars argue that, the law should essentially be understood as a
simple aggregate of intercoursing individuals in social groups in both past and
contemporary societies; be they ancient or modern.
The sociological jurists are
interested in how law impacts on society and the way around it. They believe
that through that impact it plays a role for development.
This school of thought developed as a
reaction to rigid positivism which was preoccupied with state coercion rather
than moral justice in human relations. It also opposed historical school’s
orientation towards customs and traditions of the past which were seen as
obstacles to the growth of law and promoters of myopic nationalism in various
countries.
Law is viewed by proponents of
sociological jurisprudence, as an amalgamation of other disciplines such as
psychology, philosophy, economics, political science among others. For them,
law is an applied science used to solve problems encountered by societies at
large or individuals personally. Instead of being considered as a mere command,
divine will or a mirror image of the people’s conscience, sociological jurists
have stressed its functional role and influence on society.
Auguste Comte, Herbert Spencer,
Rudolph Ihring, Eugen Ehrlich, Leon Duguit, Francois Geny, Dean Roscoe Pound
and Supreme Court judges such as Oliver Wendell Holmes and Benjamin Cardozo
were some of the major contributors to the development of sociological
jurisprudence who were influenced by Pound’s sociological theory of law.
VIEW OF
DIFFERENT JURISTS RELATED TO THE APPROACH
Montesquieu
Often seen as the father of the
sociological school of jurisprudence, Montesquieu was a French legal thinker.
Even though he did not directly hold forth for sociological jurisprudence, his
thoughts paved way towards understanding how social conditions impact upon law
and legal institutions. In his book “The Spirit of the Laws”, Montesquieu
stressed that the laws of a country should be influenced by its own
peculiarities and take into account many factors including climate, soil
fertility, geographical location, leading professions, religion; riches; trade;
manners and customs.
Montesquieu held that history was an
important tool in understanding societal structures and economics played a
major role. He said that the laws of any given nation have to be molded
according to its specific national characteristics to ensure that there is
harmony among different factions making up a society.
Montesquieu’s knowledge about how law
affects societies has made him one of the precursors of sociological
jurisprudence since he argued for taking into consideration such things as
social interdependence between law and society as well as economic factors
during the analysis of legality. Therefore, Montesquieu’s contributions deserve
recognition as one of the early influences on this school.
Auguste Comte
August Comte, the famous French legal
thinker and philosopher, is considered to be the founding father of sociology
because he was the first person to use “sociology” as a separate subject. He
used scientific method in studying sociology that is often referred to as
‘positivism’. According to him, like any other living organism, society can
change for the best if it follows scientific laws. To do this, he suggested
that principles should be formulated through observation and experimentation of
facts alone, excluding metaphysical considerations.
Moreover, Comte also argued that
human beings cannot live in isolation since they are inherently social
creatures. He added by saying all human desires arise from their social life
and therefore should be directed and controlled by law and politics. From this
point of view, Comte insisted that law must focus on society rather than an
individual. Such sociological framework had a great impact on further
positivist thinkers like Durkheim who developed theories about social
solidarity based on his foundation while later philosophers such as Leon Duguit
were inspired by these jurists in creating his own theory of solidarism.
Herbert Spencer
Herbert Spencer, an English
sociological theorist, made a great contribution to our understanding of how
society has evolved from simpler to more complicated forms; it provided a
scientific base for the organic theory of society. There are four sources of
law according to Spencer: divine laws, fiat from bygone rulers, the will of the
ruler and opinion of the majority. He differentiated between divine laws and
human laws as hardened customs.
Spencer felt that law was created so
as to manage societal disagreements arising from conflicting interests among
people in society.[1] Dr.
Allen summed up Spencer’s social organism on his belief that members of this
community relied on each other thereby emphasizing civilization responsibility
beyond the traditional sovereign-subject relationship. Spencer's theory
stressed the necessity of looking at other social phenomena when considering
legislation.[2]
Influencing their consorts later
scholars in jurisprudence have gone deep into socio-legal research and looked
at how law is related with society.
Roscoe Pound
The father of this approach is often
referred to. As Dean Roscoe Pound rightly stated, “sociological jurists pay
more attention to the working of the law rather than its abstract content.”
According to Roscoe Pound’s outlining[3]:
i.
Sociological
jurist lay emphasis on the functional aspect of law as opposed to its abstract
contents. They argue that law cannot be separated from the complexities and
practical problems of society.
ii.
It
is seen as a social institution which is closely linked with other disciplines
and affecting society directly. They contend that human experience informs law
construction for societal demands. In sociological jurisprudence, law is
understood as an amalgamation of various fields such as philosophy, psychology,
political science, economics, sociology among others. The worth or otherwise of
a legal provision depends on how it would look in terms of utility, use,
effects; practices; functions.
iii.
The
sociological school, unlike analytical positivism, dismisses all abstraction. This
means that they do not believe in the command or power side of law. The second
point is that historical jurisprudence gives great weight to past culture and
traditions.
iv.
Its
approach towards law can be different from each other as per sociological jurists.
Critical legal studies (CLS) on the other hand argue for looking at the
functional aspect of law pragmatically as a social science. An example of this
is where Holmes defined law in terms of judicial prediction based on court
verdicts while Pound thought that it was connected with adjustment of human
conditions to prevailing social forces within a society.
SOCIOLOGICAL
JURISPRUDENCE IN INDIAN CONTEXT
To comprehensively assess sociology
and jurisprudence in India, this paper must look at both pre-independence and
current Indian law. It is something that was not good for the social needs of
the Indian population. This was a cruel system that did not care for the
feelings and expectations of the Indian people. By doing this, they were able
to divide Indians along caste lines so as to exploit them against each other in
order to serve their own selfish interests. So, before independence, laws in
India operated under formalism, rigidity, repression and punishment which
positions itself well with Austin’s command theory of law.
Legislative, executive and judicial
arms used law to protect Britain’s interests ignoring even basic human rights
of local people who were abused and deprived by the colonial masters. Austin’s
theory refers to a situation where ‘justice according to law’ would have been
called upon although it meant actual sanctions against Indians. The existing
statutes provided British residents in India with several exemptions as well as
privileges leading to “one law for the ruler and another for the ruled.”
The historical context of this
controversy brings to light the necessity for a social approach to law in
India, which takes into consideration the cultural, social and economic
conditions of Indian society. The interests and rights of its populace should
be at the forefront with an aim of dealing with the disparities and wrongs that
have been very common during colonialism.
IMPORTANCE
OF SOCIOLOGICAL JURISPRUDENCE IN GROWTH OF LEGISLATURE AND JUDICIARY SYSTEM IN
INDIA
The growth of the legislative and
judicial functions under the Indian Constitution, which have evolved following
the introduction of Sociological Jurisprudence in India.
These perspectives allow lawmakers to
consider their proposed laws’ societal implications or consequences, thereby
improving the legislative process. Consequently, this has resulted in more
comprehensive legislation that is better able to address varied needs and
interests of Indian society.
In line with this principle,
sociological jurisprudence when adopted by judiciary leads to a fair
decision-making process. The judges are now much better placed as they have a
wider understanding of the social context within which legal disputes happen.
This approach has led to an improved interpretation and implementation of law
that not only ensures justice but also enhances the social cohesion in India.
In general, sociological
jurisprudence in India has raised the bar on both legislative and judicial
functions within the Indian constitution thus making it more responsive and
equitable from a legal perspective.
IMPACT OF
SOCIOLOGICAL JURISPRUDENCE ON JUDICIARY SYSTEM OF INDIA -
The wave of nationalism and
intellectual awakening gave rise to strong demands for civil liberties and
basic human rights. However, British colonial rule suppressed, oppressed and
exploited people without any check. Lawyers and judges often mechanically
interpreted and applied the law, paying no attention to the actual needs and
emotions of the people.
Indian National Leaders like Mahatma
Gandhi and Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru were among those who believed that English
Law did not address Indian society’s needs because it was strictly guided by
the Doctrine of Precedent. Nehru insisted that nineteenth-century legal
doctrines and principles had little use in a changed twentieth-century world.
He argued that reliance on precedents too much barred sociological approach to
create new legal jurisprudence.
Upon gaining independence, India
adopted a new constitution which embodied social philosophy as well as economic
values aimed at achieving an egalitarian welfare state. This was quite
different from the British legal system, which set up a legal arrangement
centered on Indian peoples’ aspirations. The Fundamental Rights chapter of the
Indian Constitution contains several chapters on individual liberties and
freedom as well as a Directive Principles of State Policy section on social
rights. In their judicial decisions, judges have tried to balance individual
rights with broader social interests.[4]
The role of law in India nowadays is
conflict resolution involving Fundamental Rights and Directive Principles of
State Policy which are both aimed at creating an egalitarian society for the
sake of the welfare of the whole country.[5]
The herewith statement in the preamble, coupled with parts pertaining to
fundamental rights, directive principles, fundamental duties[6],
powers and functions of judiciary and constitution amendment procedures all
clearly point towards welfare for the masses in India and making law more
responsive to social needs.
The dynamic trends on public
litigation have provided new ways of looking at the law in the perspective of
society. Contributing judges like Dr P.B Gajendragadkar, P.N Bhagwati, D.A
Desai, Justice Krishna Iyer and others have been significant in developing a
new Indian jurisprudence that is based on the realities of life. This further
shows that the law can act as an effective tool for social transformation aimed
at ushering in a new social order which is biased towards equity.
In his judgement on Indira Sawhney v.
Union of India[7], Mr.
Justice P.B. Sawant emphasized that the Constitution of India being basically a
political document must be read to mean “the felt necessities of time’.” Unlike
other constitutions, India’s constitution has within it provisions for desired
social change. Such changes ought to be made as quickly as possible with
minimal friction or any disruption to national life.
The Supreme Court rendered a landmark
ruling on secularism in the case of SR Bommai v Union of India[8]
through a special nine-judge bench. Providing equal treatment to all faiths and
denominations is obligatory upon the State, the court ruled. Additionally, it
was held that secularism formed part of the basic structure and fundamental law
of Indian political system. To ensure that all citizens have access to such
socio-economic prerequisites as material well-being, spiritual welfare and
political justice; it is purposeful for secularism to enhance human dignity by
enabling them achieve moral advancement and attain both wealth and power.
WHY OBEY
THE LAW?
A
SOCIOLOGICAL PERSPECTIVE IN INDIA
In any society, the question of why
individuals obey the law is a fundamental one. This question is uniquely
addressed by the sociological school of jurisprudence which focuses on the role
played by the law in promoting social well-being and sustaining social order.
The purpose of this paper is to analyze sociological basis for obedience to law
especially within India.
Social Solidarity and Interdependence
Sociological school perceives social
solidarity as crucial towards its perspective. Durkheim, an eminent sociology
pioneer claimed that societies work through interconnections among people.
Goods and services are exchanged between parties with emotional support
provided. For instance, law is said to act like glue holding all together so as
to ensure cooperation among citizens and prevent conflicts.
India’s complex and diverse society
requires social solidarity so as to attain stability and progress. Laws such as
Indian Penal Code (IPC) or Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) lay down clear
standards of what is acceptable behavior thus creating predictability in a
situation that would have resulted into chaos. By adhering to these laws, one
honors other persons’ rights hence facilitating a functional social order.
The Use of Law for Social Change
According to sociological
jurisprudence, law is not a body of static rules but a dynamic instrument for
social objectives. Legal frameworks can be seen as responding to evolving
societal concerns. For instance, the constitutional provisions on affirmative
action in India reflect the need to address historic disparities. This
contributes to making the society more fair and just.
Additionally, laws are agents of
social transformation. The Indian Anti-Dowry Act and bans on female infanticide
were aimed at combating deeply rooted social vices. In this regard, adherence
to these regulations helps form positive social change.
Law’s Legitimacy and Norm
Internalization
Sociological jurisprudence suggests
that legal legitimacy is critical to its effectiveness. It stems from shared
belief in the equity and efficacy of the legal system itself. Individuals are
more likely internalize them as part of societal norms where laws are perceived
as just or serving greater good.
In India, the Constitution represents
an important founding document containing principles such as justice, equality
and liberty. Adherence to laws upholding these principles not only strengthens
legality but also builds a sense of responsibility among citizens.
Social Engineering and Balancing
Interests
Social engineering, a concept
significant in sociological jurisprudence, refers to transforming societies
through legal mechanisms. Legal prescriptions can be exploited to influence
society’s direction toward certain ends such as environmental conservation or
economic growth. In the process of adhering to such statutes, one is
instrumental in achieving such wider societal objectives.
Nevertheless, navigating conflicting
interests is not easy. India’s huge social and economic imbalances occasion
circumstances where laws could have differential impacts on various sets of
people. It is here that sociological jurisprudence calls for law to be
adaptable and adjustable so as to keep pace with changing social realities.
Through critically engaging with the law and advocating for reforms,
individuals take part in the continuous process of social engineering.
Socialization and Informal Norms
Law’s impact transcends formal legal
codes. Socialization counts much in shaping behavior. Family, religious
organizations, as well as educational systems contribute towards internalizing
informal norms which reinforce legal structures.
The Indian landscape consists of a
rich tapestry of cultural and religious traditions interwoven with its legal
system. These customary ideas are often consistent with prevailing norms that
require obedience to rules thereby creating social predictability within
communities.
CONCLUSION
The question of why one should obey
the law in India is a complicated mix of social patterns, historical
backgrounds and the changing relationship between individual and state.
Nevertheless, making sense out of the legal system is difficult because
it has to navigate through certain challenges like bureaucracy hurdles and
social hierarchies.
However, there are many reasons that
make it important for individuals to obey the law. By so doing, it helps to
create a predictable environment necessary for planning personal lives and
businesses. Such laws protect basic rights and enhance social fairness mainly
among disadvantaged groups. Moreover, seeking legal measures allows people
address unfairness in order to expose accountable leaders .
But there is no way to follow along
blindly. The basis of a social perspective of sociology is to think about law
critically itself. These laws should be changed by the use of pressure
groups and litigation where such laws perpetuate social injustices or are
outmoded. Trust in the legal system is important and promoting transparency and
expediency within the judicial system are critical.
Finally, a society that respects the
rule of law must combine two approaches. One has to do with developing a
culture of legal literacy and civic participation; this cannot happen in India
without the other on their own hand. Alternatively, it is imperative
that law making process incorporates changing societal dynamics in India. By
doing so, India would move towards a future where instead of being just rules,
the law becomes an instrument for ensuring fairness for all in society.
REFERENCES
1.
Sociological
School of Jurisprudence, iPleaders, available at https://blog.ipleaders.in/sociological-school-of-jurisprudence/.
2. Sociological
School of Jurisprudence, Law Notes, available at https://lawnotes.co/sociological-school-of-jurisprudence/.
3. Sociological
Jurisprudence, Legal Services India, available at https://www.legalservicesindia.com/article/2190/Sociological-Jurisprudence.html.
4. R.P.
Singh, Sociological School of Jurisprudence, ResearchGate
(Nov. 2023), available at https://www.researchgate.net/publication/375595029_SOCIOLOGICAL_SCHOOL_OF_JURISPRUDENCE.
5. Do
We Have an Obligation to Obey Law?, Legal Services India, available at
https://www.legalservicesindia.com/article/2559/Do-We-Have-An-Obligation-To-Obey-Law.html.
6. Why
Do We Obey Laws? Naturalism or Positivism, International Journal of
Law Management & Humanities, available at https://ijlmh.com/paper/why-do-we-obey-laws-naturalism-or-positivism/.
7. Duty
to Obey the Law, Law Teacher, available at https://www.lawteacher.net/free-law-essays/administrative-law/duty-to-obey-the-law-administrative-law-essay.php.
8.
Tom R. Tyler, Why Do People Obey the Law?,
ResearchGate (1990), available at https://www.researchgate.net/publication/220011500_Why_do_People_Obey_the_Law.
[1] Spencer Herbert: Principles of
Sociology p. 537
[2] Dr. Allen C.K.: Law in the
Making (7th ed. 1964) p. 85.
[3] Roncou Pound! The Sco|«f And
Purpoil of Soclolojjicnl Jurisprudence (1911) 25 Hnr. L. Rev; 489.
[4] Part III of the Constitution of
India relates to the Fundamental Rights and Part IV embodies the Directive
Principles of State Policy.
[5] Keshavanand Bharti(AIR 1973 SC
1461: Minerva Mills v. Union of India, 1980 SC 1789.Waman Rao v. union India
,AIR 1980 SC 271)
[7] AIR 1993 SC 447(634)
[8] AIR SC 1918
Article Information
WHY ONE SHOULD OBEY THE LAW FROM A SOCIOLOGICAL VIEWPOINT?
Authors: ARYA HARIKESH SHARMA
- Journal IJLRA
- ISSN 2582-6433
- Published 2025/03/26
- Issue 7
About Journal
International Journal for Legal Research and Analysis
- Abbreviation IJLRA
- ISSN 2582-6433
- Access Open Access
- License CC 4.0
All research articles published in International Journal for Legal Research and Analysis are open access and available to read, download and share, subject to proper citation of the original work.
Disclaimer: The opinions expressed in this publication are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of International Journal for Legal Research and Analysis.