RULE OF LAW

By-Sumiara Begum

“It is the rule of law alone which hinders the rulers from turning themselves into the worst gangsters”- Ludwig von Mises

Abstract

The concept of Rule of Law stands as a foundational pillar of democratic governance and justice systems across the globe. This paper examines the historical evolution of the doctrine, its incorporation into the Indian constitutional framework, and its judicial interpretations through landmark judgments. The discussion extends to the relevance of A.V. Dicey's principles in the modern era, incorporating socio-economic rights alongside civil and political liberties. Contemporary challenges and recommendations for strengthening the Rule of Law in India are also presented. Rule of Law : An upheld denomination of democratic governance and justice systems internationally It represents the concept that no one, even the highest authority in our country is exempted from obeying the law but that governments should be under rule of law and not rule outside the law. This paper traces the historical evolution of this doctrine, from its philosophical roots in classical Greek thought and its formalization in English constitutional law, and documents its integration into the Indian constitutional scheme. It turns the lens on how its judicial ascensions depict, signaling the way it helps in upholding constitutional supremacy, defending individual rights, and safeguarding the separation of powers. The current article also underscore the applicability of A.V. Dicey's principle in present era and argue for a doctrinal transformation to incorporate socio-economic rights beyond political/civil liberties under Rule of Law concept. It also draws on comparative material citing trends internationally and by international bodies such as the UN. Later, the book examines modern problems—adjudication delay, legislative encroachment, executive overreach and corruption in the system. The paper concludes with specific policy proposals to enhance the Rule of Law in India, focusing on legal reform, judicial independence and improved public legal literacy as potent instruments of justice, equality and democratic stability.

Keywords: Rule of Law, Constitutionalism, Judiciary, Equality before Law, India

I. Introduction

“It is the rule of law alone which hinders the rulers from turning themselves into the worst gangsters” - Ludwig von Mises.

The derivation of the phrase ‘Rule of Law’ is from the French phrase “La Principe de legalite” which means the ‘principle of legality’. It refers to a government based on principles of law and not of men. Rule of Law means no man is above law and every person is subject to the jurisdiction of ordinary courts of law irrespective of their position and rank.  

The state is governed by the nominated representatives of the people by law and the concept of rule of law enshrines that the Grundnorm of the country or the basic law from which all other law derives its authority is the supreme law of the state. In its broader sense, the Rule of Law operates as a safeguard for civil liberties and as a mechanism to prevent arbitrary governance. It not only demands that legal authority be exercised within established limits, but also that such authority is used in a manner consistent with justice, fairness, and equality. This ensures that power is distributed in a balanced way among the organs of the state, avoiding concentration in any one branch. In democratic societies, it also serves as a constant reminder that governance exists to serve the people, and not the other way around. By upholding the sanctity of law over the whims of individuals, the Rule of Law creates a stable and predictable environment in which citizens can enjoy their rights and participate fully in civic life.

II. Historical Development

The genesis of Rule of Law can be traced back to the 13th century A.D. when Henry de Bracton distinguished between law and king, asserting their mutual subjection. Although Bracton did not use the phrase itself, Sir Edward Coke during the reign of James I is credited with formalizing the term. Greek philosophers like Plato and Aristotle also discussed similar concepts around 350 BC. However, it was A.V. Dicey in “Law and the Constitution” who provided a structured exposition, identifying three core pillars: supremacy of law, equality before the law, and predominance of the legal spirit.

Over the centuries, this idea was developed through constitutional charters like the Magna Carta of 1215 that restricted royal power and secured specific rights for subjects. Law in the form of the Bill of Rights of 1689 extended parliamentary sovereignty to England. The Enlightenment era for its part extended the philosophical underpinnings of the doctrine to human rights and democratic governance (at least, globally).

In colonial settings --the most significant being India-- the Rule of Law seemlessly co-existed with arbitrary veins within imperial power relations; these internal incoherences framed constitutional thinking in those engaging with questions of freedom during Indian independence. With the Cold War prevailing from the mid-20th century, the doctrine became an adjunct to human rights and international law and to post-war democratic reconstruction, reflecting a broader commitment to legality in domestic as well as global governance.

III. Modern Interpretations

In modern times, the Rule of Law is understood as a safeguard against official arbitrariness, ensuring predictability, transparency, and accountability in governance. While Dicey’s theory remains influential, it has expanded to include social, political, economic, and educational rights. Davis outlined seven aspects of modern Rule of Law, including law and order, natural justice, fixed rules, elimination of discretion, fair process, judicial preference, and judicial review.

Modern views also stress the principle's evolving content. It now includes the concept that laws should be just, made known in advance, and applied without discrimination, as well as capable of changing to meet democratic change. According to international bodies, such as the United Nations and World Justice Project, The Rule of Law is vital when it comes anti-corruptive measures or in protecting marginalized sections of society. Modern application also encompasses technological governance—making sure that emergent fields such as digital privacy, artificial intelligence and cyber security are working within legal and ethical boundaries. This more expansive sense appreciates that legality serves not just as a check against potential abuses of power but as an affirmative architecture for nurturing the very conditions that allow justice and fairness to flourish.

IV. Rule of Law in the Indian Constitution

Although influenced by England, Rule of Law has roots in ancient Indian texts like the Upanishads.

In India, it is embedded across various constitutional provisions:- Article 13(1) invalidates laws contravening the Constitution.- Article 14 ensures equality before law.- Article 21 safeguards life and liberty under due process.

Judicial independence is protected through separation of powers between the executive, legislature, and judiciary. And again, Preamble of the Indian Constitution depicts Rule of Law in its spirit by pronouncing that the Republic has committed itself to justice—social, economic and political; equality of status and opportunity.

The Articles 12–35 -Fundamental Rights, are the functional spindles on which the legal norms rotate around ensuring human dignity. Move towards the Directive Principles of State Policy for achieving social justice and equity. The courts have perceived these provisions widely through judicial activism — for example, Article 21 now includes the right to a clean environment, education and privacy. This also reflects upon the fact that in India, Rule of Law is not one time costume and it is a changing concept with its roots to societal requirement balancing the constitutional ideals vis-a-vis the practical governance challenges.

V. Landmark Judicial Pronouncements

Key judgments have shaped the application of Rule of Law in India:

- ADM Jabalpur v. Shivkanth Shukla (1976): Justice H.R. Khanna’s dissent underscored that life and liberty cannot be taken without lawful authority.

- Chief Settlement Commr, Punjab v. Om Prakash: Reaffirmed judicial authority to review administrative actions.

- Secretary, State of Karnataka v. Umadevi (2006): Linked public employment equality to Rule of Law.

- Gadakh Yashwantrao Kankarrao v. Balasaheb Vikhe Patil (1994): Emphasized electoral purity as essential to democracy.

- Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala (1973): Established Rule of Law as part of the Constitution’s basic structure.

In ADM Jabalpur v. Shivkanth Shukla AIR 1967 SC 1207, the question before the court was ‘whether there was any rule of law in India apart from Article21’. This was in the context of suspension of enforcement of Articles14, 21 and 22 during the proclamation of an emergency. The answer to the majority of the bench was in negative for the question of law. However, Justice H.R. Khanna dissented from the majority opinion and observed that: “Even in absence of Article 21 in the Constitution, the state has got no power to deprive a person of his life and liberty without the authority of law. Without such sanctity of life and liberty, the distinction between a lawless society and one governed by laws would cease to have any meaning…Rule of Law is now the accepted norm of all civilized societies”

Again, in Chief Settlement Commr; Punjab v. Om Prakash, it was observed by the Supreme Court that, “In our constitutional system, the central and most characteristic feature is the concept of rule of law which means, in the present context, the authority of law courts to test all administrative action by the standard of legality. The administrative or executive action that does not meet the standard will be set aside if the aggrieved person brings the matter into notice.”

In Secretary, State of Karnataka and Ors. v. Umadevi (3)and Ors AIR 2006 SC 1806, a Constitution Bench of this Court observed that it is clear that adherence to the rule of equality in public employment is a basic feature of our Constitution and since the rule of law is the core of our Constitution, a court would certainly be disabled from passing an order upholding a violation of Article 14 or in ordering the overlooking of the need to comply with the requirements of Article 14 read with Article 16 of the Constitution.In Gadakh Yashwantaro Kankarrao v. Balasaheb Vikhe Patil AIR 1994 SC 678, it was laid down that the rule of law has to be preserved as the essence of the democracy of which purity of elections is a necessary concomitant, it is the duty of the courts to appreciate the evidence and construe the law in a manner which would sub serve this higher purpose and not even imperceptibly facilitate acceptance, much less affirmance, of the falling electoral standards.

For democracy to survive, rule of law must prevail, and it is necessary that the best available men should be chosen as people's representatives for proper governance of the country.

Lastly, the popularly know case of Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala AIR 1973 SC 1461, the Supreme Court held that the Rule of Law is an essential part of the basic structure of the constitution and as such cannot be amended by any Act of Parliament, thereby showing how the law is superior to all other authority of men.

These have been an example of how constitutional provisions are relegated to the realms of oblivion and judicial interpretation then comes in to resurrect it with a different life. They also illustrate the judiciary's place in a highly political balancing act between state power and individual rights.  For example, in the context of environmental law, the Supreme Court has relied on Rule of Law norms to circulate compliance with environmental standards. It has also clamped down on ways in which democratic fairness is sometimes undermined in elections. These interventions strengthen the primary principle of legality's demand that governance be ethically and constitutionally appropriate while according to the spirit of rule of law pronouncements.

VI. Challenges and Recommendations

Challenges include outdated legislation, judicial delays, and corruption. Safeguarding judicial independence from executive influence is essential. Reforms should focus on modernizing legal frameworks, enhancing judicial capacity, and preventing unconstitutional laws from being passed or enforced.

Secondly, as the naked truth suggests, lack of legal awareness among citizens acts against the effectiveness of Rule-of-Law. There is a need for public legal education, transparent legal drafting and better dispute resolution infrastructure.

These mechanisms must not perpetuate the existing imbalances and civil society should pay particular attention to advocating access of rural and most marginalised communities in terms are not placed as high a bar to justice that is impossible, or that they are subjected to stipulated time consuming procedures for convening these bodies promptly on all alleged cases. Technology can transform how we deliver justice — digital courts, e-filing systems and AI-powered legal research can help cut through backlogs and delay.

Nevertheless, these hallmarks of technological advancements should be delivered in a manner that safeguards privacy and ensures there is no system-based bias. Finally, it is also important to cultivate a culture of constitutional morality amongst legislators, administrators and citizens for the Rule of Law to take root as not merely an obligatory legal text but as a common democratic ethos.

VII. Conclusion

Rule of Law remains deeply embedded in India’s democratic fabric. Its full realization depends on the coordinated efforts of all state organs, adherence to constitutional supremacy, and protection of rights in both letter and spirit. At heart, the Rule of Law encompasses both a legal theory and a societal ideal, one that all of us want: Power used for good. Although India has in its constitutional design this enshrined principle, their good implementation necessitates constant vigilance, periodic legal reforms, and robust citizen engagement. The obstacles—be they political exigencies, economic disparities or technological disruptions—call for a resolute adherence to legality and justice.

Just as important is building a public culture that cherishes fair play, openness and regard for the law. Our schools, universities and civic organizations should have constitutional literacy as an essential element of their educational systems, as this would help a great deal to prepare informed citizens who will be able to responsibly demand accountability from those in power.

International evidence also proves societies that have strong Rule of Law mechanisms fare better during crises, are more economically stable and enjoy higher public trust. This means that, for India, its Constitution should not simply be a matter of preserving those milestones but constantly reinforcing and augmening them to keep pace with democratic requirements. This is the only way that we can realize the promise of the Rule of Law and safeguard democracy for all generations to come.

References

1. A.V. Dicey, Introduction to the Study of the Law of the Constitution (10th edn., Macmillan, 1959).

2. H.W.R. Wade & C.F. Forsyth, Administrative Law (11th edn., Oxford University Press, 2014).

3. Upendra Baxi, “Rule of Law in India: Theory and Practice” (2011) 53(3) Journal of the Indian Law Institute 289.

4. S.P. Sathe, Judicial Activism in India: Transgressing Borders and Enforcing Limits (2nd edn., Oxford University Press, 2002).

5. M.P. Jain, Indian Constitutional Law (8th edn., LexisNexis, 2018).

6. ADM Jabalpur v. Shivkant Shukla, AIR 1976 SC 1207.

7. Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala, AIR 1973 SC 1461.

8. Secretary, State of Karnataka v. Umadevi (3), AIR 2006 SC 1806.

9. Chief Settlement Commr, Punjab v. Om Prakash, AIR 1969 SC 33.

10. Gadakh Yashwantrao Kankarrao v. Balasaheb Vikhe Patil, AIR 1994 SC 678.

11. H.R. Khanna, Neither Roses Nor Thorns (Eastern Book Company, 1980).

12. V.S. Deshpande, “The Judicial Power in India and the Constitutional Limitations” (1975) 17(2) Journal of the Indian Law Institute 245.

13. United Nations, “Rule of Law and Human Rights” available at: https://www.un.org/ruleoflaw/thematic-areas/human-rights/

14. Law Commission of India, Report on Delay and Arrears in Trial Courts (Report No. 245, 2014).

15. World Justice Project, “Rule of Law Index 2023” available at: https://worldjusticeproject.org/rule-of-law-index

Note- Views and opinions as expressed in this article are solely of the author and Indian Legal Wing is not liable for the same. The information contained in this article is for general information purposes only. We endeavour to keep all the information up to date and try our level best to avoid any misinformation or any kind of objectionable content. If you found any misinformation or objectionable contents in this website please report us at indianlegalwing@gmail.com