Legality Vs. Legitimacy: A Comparative Study Of Rule Of Law And Rule By Law
Sagar Agrawal, Research Scholar, The West Bengal National University of Juridical Sciences
ABSTRACT
The demarcation between the notions of Rule of Law and Rule by Law lies in the acts of governance themselves, which render them legal or legitimate. The constant debate between law and power raised serious questions on Constitutional principles, democratic governance, and political philosophy. While both conceptions involve the creation and operation of legal systems, they differ fundamentally in purpose, structure, and implications for human liberty. The Rule of law refers to a constitutional order in which legislation acts as a check on arbitrary power, assuring equality before the law, judicial independence, accountability of state institutions, and the safeguarding of fundamental rights. Rule by Law, on the other hand, refers to political rulers using legal procedures to legitimise control, repress dissent, and consolidate power, frequently while retaining the appearance of legality. The paper critically examines the philosophical basis, institutional characteristics, and practical implications of these two opposing legal paradigms. It concludes that the sustainability of democratic governance depends not only on the existence of laws but also on the ethical and constitutional values that govern their implementation. The contrast between the two remains important for assessing the health of modern democracies and the prospects of constitutional governance in the twenty-first century.
Keywords: rule of law, rule by law, constitutionalism, independent judiciary, democracy, civil liberty, constitutional morality.
