Conceptually Different Concept and

Dworkin’s theory of law came as a critique of legal positivism which demonstrate integrity of
law, politics and morality.

Dworkin’s theory can be summarized in four parts:
(i) There is a standard social rule in any society which governs the act of both public
officials as well as private individuals.
(ii) the rule of recognition exists as an authoritative test to identify valid rules of law,
(iii) a law, generally, does not require moral validation, therefore, law and morality are
conceptually different concept and
(iv) whether to decide a case on the basis of morality is based on the discretion of the
judge.
According to him justice is relied on the notion of just society and state. Secondly, he
contended that apart from the concept of equality, liberty and democracy, the political
morality is also connected to law of the society
Dworkin contended the narrower interpretation of the term ‘ethics’, refers to individual
ethics, the study of how to live well, while the broader interpretation refers to personal or
political morality, the study of how we or a sovereign power must treat other people.
His idea is evolved around the value of ‘ethical humanism’, a value which is followed by
every individual in spite of their personal discrepancy.
Dworkin’s idea of ethical humanism has been a major part of the current legal system of
India. The idea of values which exist irrespective of discrepancy in cultural ethics have been
enshrined in the constitution of India in the shape of fundamental rights. Which guarantee
basic human dignity, equality and freedom to every citizen regardless of their cultural and
social background.
Liberal theory of justice and political morality proposed by Dworkin drew on the principles
of the ethical individualism and the individual responsibility.
In his book Sovereign Virtue Dworkin interpretated the principle of ethical individualism
which states that the constitutionality of a sovereign power derives from fair concern for each
and every citizen. The essence of the principle is that a just and fair distribution of the
resources among its citizen is of utmost importance for the sovereign power, that means
“endowment insensitive” (indifferent towards individual’s social status) and “ambition-
sensitive” (careful to personal choices)
In contemporary law equality and non-discrimination are central to the body of rights guaranteed by
international human rights law such as Universal Declaration of Human right and the Office of the
High Commissioner for Human Rights
Even the non-discrimination provision in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights lists “property”
as one of the prohibited grounds of distinction and this provision applies to all of the rights in the
Declaration. This “means that it prohibits wealth-based distribution of education, health care and
social security
The second principle of the individual responsibility directs an individual to be responsible

for his/her own life choices, but as indicated by Dworkin, the principle of individual
responsibility doesn't imply that individuals don’t need to think about others and do whatever
they wish.
This idea of Dworkin is also enshrined in the constitution in the form of fundamental duties.
Recently, the Bombay High Court while taking note of a suo motu petition on the difficulties
faced by migrant workers, daily wagers and health workers amid Covid-19, observed that the
Union and state governments had been issuing notifications and guidelines asking people to
avoid gatherings and maintain social distancing. Justice PB Varale held: “In this difficult
time, it is a fundamental duty of a citizen to promote harmony and think about other people of
India as well.”
But Dworkin’s later work focuses more on liberal ethics, discussion of which was absent in
his former works. According to Dworkin liberal ethics should be theoretical, and not depend
upon the acceptance by various individual ethical sentiments.
Liberal ethics build upon the essence of a decent life, with dynamic issues.
Dworkin clarified a "challenge model of ethics" according to which basic prosperity and
voluntary prosperity are two different notions
While the "Basic prosperity" and "basic personal matters" lead toward an acknowledgment of
equity as a boundary of individual morals, that is the "basic prosperity" assumes
contemplating – as a rule what might be a finer life. The voluntary prosperity is built on self-
centred interest.
The Dworkin’s "challenge model of ethics", works on the Aristotelian principle that a decent
life has a characteristic estimation of a skilful implementation.
Later development in his theories argues that integrity of law must be consistent and while
retaining integrity of law it may fail popular morality of the society.
There are two notions of the connection between a political ethics, individual morals, and
objectivity of the state. The first is known as a “strategy of discontinuity”, in which the
impartiality of the state is a key guideline, and the equity matters just in the form of
procedures along with objective institutional guidelines, having nothing to do with individual
moral intention and with a common good.
The second is known as a “technique of congruity”, as per which the unbiased state action is
a determined rule. In this situation, there exists an indirect or internal connection between the
common good, the diversity in the individual impression of a decent life, and equity.
Supreme Court of India in several cases adopted Dworkin’s interpretive theory and while
withholding that the equity possibly disturb the sentiment and cultural value of the society but
is necessary. In New India Assurance Co. Ltd. vs Takhuben Raghabhai And Ors., court
opined that, ‘The judges are restricted to adjudge the case within the boundaries of values set
by the legal system. Judgement passed by the courts are meant to further those values and
portray legal doctrine as a consistent expression of them’
While citing Dworkin judges in SR Bomai case observed that, “some parts of any
constitutional theory must be independent of the intentions or beliefs of the people. Some part
must stand on its own political or moral theory; otherwise, the theory would be wholly
circular. The courts as an interpreter are called upon to fill significant constitutional gaps in
variety of ways. The court as determiners of public values should vigorously describe some
small revolution and principles. Their source of moral foundation of issues is based on
ethical or moral principles.”
National Legal Services Authority v. Union of India (transgender got recognition in Indian
legal system)
Dworkin's theory originally emerged as a critique of positivism and denied the idea of
common law for every society; however, his idea changed a lot through years and embraced a
great deal of positivism and contended that the law should have ethical boundaries and should
not base on individual’s ethic. However, non-of his ideas he has proposed are of less
significant in the study of jurisprudence. This is because his approach requires a more mixed
approach to legal philosophy.

Conceptually Different Concept and

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Conceptually Different Concept and

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Conceptually Different Concept and

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Dworkin’s theory of law came as a critique of legal positivism which demonstrate integrity of

law, politics and morality.

The second principle of the individual responsibility directs an individual to be responsible

You might also like