Morality and Legislation

Advocate Arjun *

Assembly Building (component of Capitol Complex) at Chingmeirong, Imphal :: 2013 :: Pix - Daniel Chabungbam

Morality in general is an art of directing the actions of Human beings in such a way to produce the greatest possible sum of good and happiness. Legislation ought to have precisely the same object but it defines greatly in extent.

Morality commands each individual to do all the good things to the community and even to oneself, but the legislations couldnot do all good things or certain things or actions. Legislations ought to command certain things to perform and ought to forbid certain things to do so. In a word, legislation has the same centre with morals for the goodness and happiness but always depend upon the circumstances of the socio-political facts of one's Nation State.

Human beings are errors in mistake or mistake in thought and deed too. Laws, in practice couldn't guarantee whether it could keep balance between. Very often, Legislatures are debating in the Parliaments/ Senates/ Houses regarding the volume of punishment sanction in case of a particular offence or crime in the State.

Every day, the volume of penal sanctions are changed but naturally are decreasing or becoming more human with the process of change in Human Civilisation. Of course, we can say that a real Human doesnot wish to sanction punishment to others though the other is in wrong or crime.

However, the state is compelled to have sanctions of punishment in forms of penal provision in order to keep the State's law and order or social peace and harmony. Perhaps man always and in many cases, desires to have straightened moral perception by a punishment. But, it is not easy to keep balance between the evil of punishment and the evil of offence

Though both Morality and Legislation ought to have the same interests to the end to produce the greatest possible sum of goodness and happiness, though they have differences in extent. All actions of mankind fall under the jurisdiction of one's morality whether of private or public in nature. Our morality can be conceptualized in two senses.

The first one composes the duties to selves and the second one is to the others. Now, there are two ways of consulting the happiness of others. The one is of Negative action that is abstaining from disturbing or creating problems to others and the other is positive in action i.e., providing labours of good knowledge, deeds, services, and so on. The first concludes "PROBITY" and the second is "BENEFICENCE".

Morality of human character commands the individuals in society to do certain things or all kinds of activities for advancement to self and even to the whole community. Legislations couldnot command or sanction each and every action like that of the morality. In short, though both concepts have the same centre and favourable objectivism, their circumstances are different and legislation is somewhat extending to certain narrower extent. Whereas Morality is the guide which leads the individual in his action throughout his life amongst crowds of his society, Legislation cannot do so in the similar manner.

Firstly, Morality cannot command and sanction for punishment like Legislations have sanctions for punishment on men for their mistakes or guilty action. Secondly, Legislation often causes mistakes in seeking punishment to an innocent as alleged accused having guilty by mistake of law. Legislation cannot have direct influence or control men upon their control except the system of sanctions for punishment. But legal sanctions and penalties are not justifiable except so far as there results from them a greater sum of goodness.

But in many cases in which we might desire to strengthen a moral perception by a punishment. The evil of punishment would be greater than the evil of offence. This means necessary to carry out the law into execution to alarm the apprehension and frighten amongst the men the injurious of such evil of punishment which in return they themselves would be intended to be prevented.

Very often the innocent victims/alleged accuseds are facing difficulties to prove the innocent or to defend themselves due to the difficulties of defining an offence precisely and clearly. Hardheartedness, ingratitude and other vices which the popular sanction punishes cannot come under the power of law unlike certain exact or precise definition of theft, homicide or perjury etc., are defined in statutory provisions. Therefore, it is also better to distinguish the true limits of morals and legislators or the differences between Morality and legislation.

Anyway, morality upon the following three points needs the aid of the law, but not in the same degree, nor in the same manner. The rules of prudence are almost sufficient of themselves. If a man fails in what regards his particular private intents, it is not his will which is in fault. It is his understanding.

If he does wrong it is through Mistake or lack of knowledge. It is also true that there is natural connection between Prudence and probity for own interest and it is understood and will never leave us without motives to abstain from injuring our fallows.

As to beneficence some distinction are necessary. The law may be extended to general objects, such as the case of the poor but for details it is necessary to depend upon private morality. Beneficence has mysteries and loves best to employ itself upon evils so unforeseen or so secret that the law cannot reach them.

Besides, it is to individual's free will that benevolence owes it energy. If the same acts would loose their attraction and their essence it is also from morality and especially religion which enhances from the necessary complement to legislation and the sweetest tie of Humanity.

A thinker namely Savingny sees a Nation and its State as Organism which is born, matured, declined and died. Law grows with the growth and strengthens with the strength of the people. It dies away as the Nation loses its Nationality.