Procedure Established by Law vs. Due Process of Law
Introduction
The concepts of Procedure Established by Law and Due Process of Law are crucial in understanding the legal framework of different democratic countries. These doctrines define how the law interacts with individual rights, particularly in matters of justice and fundamental freedoms. While India follows the principle of Procedure Established by Law, the United States follows Due Process of Law. Let us understand these concepts with simple examples and their significance for UPSC preparation.
What is Procedure Established by Law?
It means that if a law is made correctly by the government, it must be followed, even if it is unfair or unreasonable. Courts can only check whether the law was made properly, not whether it is fair.
✅ Example:
- Your school principal makes a rule: "If a student comes late, they will be suspended for a week."
- This rule was made following proper procedure, so it must be followed.
- Even if it is too strict or unfair, you still get suspended. 😔
🚦 In India: Courts must follow the law as written, even if it is harsh.
Example:
Imagine the Indian Parliament passes a law stating, “Anyone who eats ice cream on Sundays will be jailed for one year.” Since the law has been passed correctly, the courts have no power to question whether it is fair or reasonable. They must enforce it as per the procedure.
Implication:
- Ensures parliamentary supremacy in law-making.
- Courts cannot examine whether a law is unfair or unjust; they only check if proper procedure was followed.
- Risk: Even unfair or oppressive laws may be enforced if enacted correctly.
What is Due Process of Law?
The principle of Due Process of Law ensures that laws must not only follow correct procedures but must also be just, fair, and reasonable. Courts have the power to review laws and strike them down if they violate fundamental rights.
✅ Example 1:
- Suppose your principal makes the same rule: "Late students will be suspended for a week."
- But this time, the school checks if the rule is reasonable.
- They realize it's too strict and unfair, so they change it to:
- "If late, students will first get a warning. If repeated, then action will be taken."
- Now the rule is fair and just! 😃
🚦 In the USA: Courts can reject unfair laws, even if they were made properly.
Example 2:
Suppose the U.S. Congress passes a law stating, “Anyone who eats ice cream on Sundays will be jailed for one year.”
- The courts in the U.S. will check not just if the law was passed correctly but also whether the law itself is fair and reasonable.
- If they find the law unfair, arbitrary, or violating fundamental rights, they can declare it unconstitutional and strike it down.
Implication:
- Protects individuals from unfair and unreasonable laws.
- Courts act as a check on the legislature to ensure laws are just and fair.
- Strengthens fundamental rights by allowing judicial review of laws.
Key Differences
| Aspect |
Procedure Established by Law |
Due Process of Law |
| Meaning |
Courts check if law was made following the correct procedure. |
Courts check if the law is both procedurally correct and fair. |
| Judicial Power |
Courts cannot question the fairness of the law. |
Courts can declare an unfair law unconstitutional. |
| Country |
India follows this doctrine. |
USA follows this doctrine. |
| Risk |
Can lead to unfair laws being upheld. |
Prevents unfair laws but may slow down governance. |
Evolution in India
Although India follows Procedure Established by Law, the Supreme Court has expanded its interpretation over time. The landmark case Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India (1978) broadened Article 21 (Right to Life and Personal Liberty), incorporating elements of Due Process of Law. The judgment held that laws must be fair, just, and reasonable, moving closer to the U.S. model.
Conclusion
While Procedure Established by Law ensures smooth legal functioning, Due Process of Law acts as a safeguard against arbitrary legislation. Over time, Indian jurisprudence has evolved to incorporate elements of both, ensuring justice and protecting individual rights.
