Legal Procedure
“Procedure is like a prism: when its medium is transparent, it refracts justice clearly; but when clouded, it bends towards injustice”
Jurists’ Views on Procedural Fairness
- Lon Fuller’s “Inner Morality of Law”: Fuller argued that for laws to be just, they must adhere to principles of transparency and consistency. He emphasized that if procedures are not clear and are applied arbitrarily, they lead to injustice.
- H.L.A. Hart’s “The Concept of Law”: Hart believed that procedural law (secondary rules) is crucial for the enforcement of rights. A legal system’s effectiveness relies on clear and fair procedures, just as a prism must be clear to refract light correctly. When procedures are ambiguous, they lead to unjust outcomes.
- John Rawls’ “Theory of Justice”: Rawls championed the idea of “justice as fairness,” where transparent and impartial processes are essential for justice. If procedures lack transparency, the justice system fails to deliver fair outcomes.
- Roscoe Pound’s “Theory of Social Engineering”: Pound viewed law as a tool for social progress, with procedure being the key to its effective application. Any distortion in the procedural framework leads to failures in achieving justice.
Case Laws
- Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India (1978) – India
This landmark case emphasized that “procedure established by law” must be just, fair, and reasonable. The court held that procedures cannot be arbitrary and must ensure transparency to uphold justice. - Ridge v. Baldwin (1964) – United Kingdom
The UK House of Lords ruled that natural justice principles must be followed in procedural matters. The decision highlighted that even administrative actions must adhere to fair procedures, or else justice is compromised. In this case, Ridge, a police officer, was dismissed without being given a fair hearing. - Dharam Dutt v. Union of India (2004) – India
The Supreme Court reiterated the importance of procedural fairness in cases involving the deprivation of fundamental rights. The court held that any procedure that does not provide a fair chance to be heard bends toward injustice. This judgment reinforces the idea that a transparent procedural framework is essential for achieving justice. - Mapp v. Ohio (1961) – United States
In this U.S. Supreme Court case, the court ruled that evidence obtained through unconstitutional procedures (in this case, illegal searches) cannot be used in court. The procedure, if not transparent and fair, leads to a distortion of justice.
Natural Justice principles too contain 2 Basic procedural aspects