LAW ACCORDING TO JUSTICE OR JUSTICE ACCORDING TO LAW: EXAMINING THE JUDICIARY AS THE LAST HOPE OF THE COMMON MAN IN A DEMOCRATIC STATE

Abstract

Every society is governed by laws, paramount of which is the grundnorm. In a proper democratic setting, no one is above the law which, as an engine of social change, regulates the conduct of persons, institutions and government. Law is a guide to decision-making by courts. It has been recognised that law itself is incapable of solving human problems since it is not an end in itself but a means to an end. Justice is what the courts should do while interpreting laws because justice; inclusive of substantial and social justice, is the pivot of law. In a democratic state, it should be conspicuously evident that the judiciary is the last hope of the common man. Thus, in exercising its judicial functions, should law be applied according to justice or justice should be done according to law? Courts exist inter alia to do justice, to resolve disputes, to maintain the rule of law, to guarantee liberty. This is why the courts are regarded as the last hope of the common man. The judiciary will lose one of its distinctive appealing characteristics if justice cannot be found in court. Through the doctrinal methodology, this paper examines the judiciary as the last hope of the common man in the course of performing its judicial functions. The paper is divided into five parts beginning from the introduction. The conclusion drawn is that good governance and the welfare of people in a country are like Siamese twins. It is through the instrumentality of an unfaltering judiciary that this duo can be achieved.