Chapter Two:
Legal Thoughts – Schools of Jurisprudence and the Foundations of Law
Opening Epigraphs
— Fame Agidife_TheLegalLens
"The life of the law has not been logic; it has been experience."
— Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr.
Introduction: What Are Legal Thoughts?
In legal philosophy, “legal thoughts” refer to the theories, doctrines, and intellectual frameworks that define what law is, how it originates, and how it should function. They are not themselves principles of rule, but rather the conceptual foundations of jurisprudence.
These thoughts, shaped by philosophers and jurists across centuries, continue to influence how laws are drafted, interpreted, and enforced. They reveal that law is at once a moral order, a command, a social practice, and a mirror of society.
Core Idea: Law derives from universal moral truths or divine reason.
Case Illustrations:
Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala (India, 1973) → The Supreme Court invoked natural law to establish the “basic structure doctrine,” holding that Parliament cannot amend away fundamental rights.
R v. Dudley and Stephens (UK, 1884) → The court rejected necessity as a defense to killing, appealing to higher moral law.
Significance: Grounds law in morality but risks subjectivity.
Core Idea: Law is valid if enacted through proper authority, regardless of morality.
Key Thinkers: Bentham, Austin, H.L.A. Hart, Kelsen.
Case Illustrations:
A.G. of Lagos State v. A.G. of the Federation (Nigeria, 2014) → The Supreme Court emphasized adherence to constitutional provisions, reflecting positivist reasoning.
Marbury v. Madison (U.S., 1803) → Chief Justice Marshall established judicial review, asserting the written Constitution as supreme law.
Significance: Ensures clarity and order, but risks legitimizing unjust laws.
Core Idea: Law is what judges actually do, shaped by context and experience.
Key Thinkers: Holmes, Llewellyn, Frank.
Case Illustrations:
Brown v. Board of Education (U.S., 1954) → The Court departed from precedent (Plessy v. Ferguson) by acknowledging social science evidence and evolving realities in striking down segregation.
Okogie v. A.G. Lagos State (Nigeria, 1981) → Nigerian courts pragmatically balanced free education with constitutional limitations.
Significance: Reveals law’s dynamism, but undermines predictability.
4. Critical Legal Studies (CLS)
Core Idea: Law is political, reinforcing inequality and power.
Key Thinkers: Unger, Kennedy.
Case Illustrations:
Dred Scott v. Sandford (U.S., 1857) → Law upheld slavery, reflecting CLS critique that legal systems often perpetuate dominant interests.
Property and land laws in colonial Africa → Served colonial elites, reinforcing CLS claims.
Significance: Exposes biases, but accused of cynicism.
Core Idea: Law reflects the traditions and customs of a people.
Key Thinkers: Savigny, Burke.
Case Illustrations:
Development of English Common Law → Built organically from judicial precedent and custom.
Lewis v. Bankole (Nigeria, 1908) → Recognition of Yoruba customary land law illustrates law as rooted in local tradition.
Significance: Preserves cultural continuity, but resists reform.
Core Idea: Legal rules should maximize efficiency and reduce costs.
Key Thinkers: Posner, Coase.
Case Illustrations:
United States v. Carroll Towing Co. (U.S., 1947) → Judge Learned Hand introduced a negligence formula (burden vs probability × loss), aligning tort law with economic efficiency.
Nigerian tort law reforms (post-2000s) → Increasingly apply cost-benefit reasoning in negligence and liability.
Significance: Promotes efficiency, but risks sidelining equity and human dignity.
7. Comparative and Cross-Cultural Legal Thoughts
Confucian Legal Thought: Prioritizes harmony and morality.
Islamic Jurisprudence (Fiqh): Combines divine revelation with human reasoning (Ijtihad).
African Customary Law: Communal justice emphasizing reconciliation.
Case Illustration: Mohammed v. Knott (Nigeria, 1969) → The court weighed English law against Nigerian Islamic and customary practices on marriage.
Significance: Shows law as plural and culturally embedded.
Striking the Legal Balance
No single school of thought can define law fully:
Natural law ensures morality.
Positivism provides authority.
Realism accounts for lived experience.
CLS unmasks hidden biases.
Historical school roots law in custom.
Law & Economics guides efficiency.
In practice, modern courts blend schools of thought. For instance:
The U.S. Constitution blends natural law ideals (rights), positivist clarity (codified text), and realist flexibility (judicial interpretation).
Nigerian courts blend customary law, statutory law, and common law to reflect plural legal traditions.
Closing Reflection
Legal thoughts are the pillars of jurisprudence. They reveal that law is not a monolith but a dialogue — between morality and authority, tradition and reform, certainty and change. A balanced legal system draws from many schools, weaving them into a framework where laws remain just, clear, adaptable, and reflective of society’s needs.
📖 Summary of Chapter Two:
This chapter explored the great schools of legal thought with case law illustrations: Natural Law, Positivism, Realism, Critical Legal Studies, Historical School, Law & Economics, and cross-cultural traditions. Together, they provide the intellectual compass for understanding law’s foundations, reminding us that law is both a product of human reason and a protector of human dignity.
No comments:
Post a Comment