Thesis
The connection between the law and morality is rather controversial as, on the one hand, morality must be separated from law and on the other hand, morality is an inherent part of the law.
Introduction
The problem of law and morality is rather difficult, as many believe that there are no explicit distinctions between them. There are cases when morals coincide with true legal laws since humans created them. The human reason here could subconsciously shape the morality of law. However, the existence of unjust laws proves that morality and ethics are not similar. Therefore, the connection between the law and morality is rather controversial as, on the one hand, morality must be separated from law and on the other hand, morality is an inherent part of the law. In that regard, the film Trial (1963) is the confrontation of the natural laws based on morality and the juridical laws. In addition, the film also shows how the city creates its vision of the law system.
Law and morality must be separated as legal and moral standards are from being identical.
Main Body
There is an assumption that law must be separated from morality due to the fact that legal and moral standards could not be identified. Closer attention to these issues was given from the angle of legal positivism. In his article, Hart expresses his radical view on the notion of legality based on social factors but on its positive outcomes. The author insists on the fact that law is neutrally colored; it could not be referred as to something bad or good. Considering this, Hart mentions that, “to enable men to see steadily the precise issues posed by the existence of morally bad laws and to understand the specific character of the authority of a legal order” (Hart 63). The Harts premises are based on the historical background and his referring to Austin whose theory of sovereignty. However, he rejects his idea of law based on the threat of punishment as it already includes the moral aspect. The theory of legal positivism implies that in the eighteenth-century people regard the law as separate from morality.
Hart also argues that the necessity to separate the law from morality is based on the presumption that morality could negatively influence legal standards. The fact is that the notion of morality varies depending on the mentality and culture of individuals. Then the law is the universal notion that comprises a limited number of moral aspects. That is why, the legal deviations are inadmissible since could be reduced to the subjective trial, as depicted in the Welles film under the same name. Hence, the main hero of the novel Joseph K. was taken under open arrest where he was forced to recognize the crime he did not commit. The film shows what consequences could be revealed under the impact of morality under the law and vice versa. The film also represents the corrupt system of law, which is unfair and ineffective. Joseph becomes the victim of demoralized law where the trial justice is handled by the human factors. Considering the film from Hart’s point of view, it teaches that the law should and must be separated from morality. Hart admits certain moral rights to be inserted into the legal system. However, natural laws must be excluded from the process of the creation of the law, as they may have negative outcomes for society.
Further, the movie contradicts Harts’s vision on the faithfulness of the law as it reveals the idea that law should also function as a means of moral satisfaction. The trial is a justice aimed at satisfying moral issues. Hart states, “Whether every particular rule of law must satisfy a moral minimum in order to be a law, but whether a system of rules which altogether failed to do this could be a legal system” (Hart 65). In this respect, careful consideration must have the command theory of law that reveals the falsity of separation of law from morality. To explain such a contradiction, Hart divides the laws of primary and secondary obligations. The theory discloses that there are cases that refuse the logical approach but are based on social aims, which are different in certain societies. Therefore, the law directly depends on society and its peculiarities (Hart 70). In contrast, the problem of morality and law arises when the cases are resolved without consideration of social situation but simply based on rational thinking.
However, Hart in his article considers that if a law violates moral issues it could not be regarded as the standard law. The same is observed in the movie when the main hero is trialed according to the specific laws based on the morals of the citizen but not on the universally acknowledged legal norms. Relying on this, Hart constitutes, “It could not follow from the mere fact that a rule violated standards of morality that it was not a rule of law; and conversely, it could not follow from the mere fact that a rule was desirable that it was a rule of law” (Hart, 64). Consequently, the city with his own vision on “law” contains his own vision of morals that considerably deviates the conventional views on ethics and human morale. The main protagonist could not accept the new surrealistic world where he is forced to obey the newly established rules. In the world of the imaginary rules he is accused of an unspecified crime; he is also arrested but not taken in custody. Anyway, this point of view shows the negative influence of morals on the law; at the same time, morality, in its good sense, is an inherent part of the law serving the ground of the legal concepts. In other words, the film proves that law is unlikely to be separated from morals on the mere ground that they were created by humans.
Law is considered as integrity as it identifies moral constraints and political morality.
There is an opposite view, where the law is considered as integrity because it identifies the moral constraints and on political issues. In the article Morality of Law, Lon Fuller expresses his own alternative view on the morale within the legal system. According to his article, Fuller represents two types of the morality of duty and morality of aspiration. According to this, “morality of aspiration starts at the top of human achievement, the morality of duty starts at the bottom” (Fuller 5). The former enlarges on the fidelity to the law that coincides with the adherence to positive rules. Fuller rejects Hart’s ideas about the law principle of adjudication where the law is fully subjected to the state. Considering this, Fuller presents “the internal morality of law” that serves to create just laws pertaining to society. Fuller’s idea of inner morality is rather controversial, as it does not the moral norms as something negative, like in the movie Trial.
Thus, the characters of the film create their own moral system that allows them to interrogate the accused Joseph K. during daily routine. Anyway, the film shows internal morality here is based on corrupt morality that converts the legal system into the distorted juridical mechanism infected by morals. Throughout the movie, where Joseph’s life is a mere trial, the leading character is constantly trying to justify himself in front of the trial for the crime he did not accomplish. His strange feeling of guilt proves Fuller’s theory of internal morality and fidelity to the law. Fuller identifies eight features that make the law fail. In that particular film, the law is distorted due to making the rules that contradict each other (Fuller 33). By this, the author expresses the idea of the availability of law. Hence, the inspectors and a useless advocate serve as the guardians of law that are directed against the good principles of morale. The film shows that morality can destroy the adequacy of law thus supporting Fuller’s idea that the law originates from the moral norms of a particular society.
Due to the fact that morality constitutes the law, there must be corresponding constraints. According to Fuller, the neutrality of internal morality identifies the objectivity of law. In other words, the researcher addresses the legal norms from the retrospective of “morality that makes law possible”. Therefore, only morality of duty but not aspiration must be applied to the legal issues. Here, the Trial is bright evidence of inappropriate legal issues that are based on moral desires but not on obligation. To support the idea, Fuller writes “as a citizen or as an official, [a man] might be found wanting. But in such a case he was condemned for failure, not for being recreant for duty; for the shortcoming, not for wrongdoing” (Fuller 5). The movie manifests that Fuller’s concept of the morality of duty as the basic rules for a full-fledged and just society without which, it would turn out to be a mess. The thrust of the trial lies in the fact that Joseph’s morality of aspiration does not coincide with the social norms.
It is worth saying that Fuller associates inner morality with the morality of the Old Testament and the Ten Commandments (Fuller 6). The above mentions the humans’ obligations to live according to social norms. Fuller shows that morality constitutes a person’s affiliation to a certain society and his/her determination as to the refuge of the community. One could not but mention the connection of God as the creator of law. The movie reveals the impossibility to enter the reign of God, as a man is not worth being equal with God. To put in other words, it is God that could punish and justify whereas a man has to obey. Here, we could observe that God defines the inner morality of each person abused by the government.
Conclusion
In conclusion, the opposed theories of Hart and Fuller reveal several dimensions of the film. From Hart’s point of view, the film Trial teaches why the law should be separated from the law; it also manifests a rigid distinction between moral and legal standards. By means of Fuller’s theory, it is possible to highlight the ground of the trial and Joseph’s uncertain accusation. The theory of two morality uncovers the points of the corrupt legal system of the city is motivated by the morality of aspiration but not the morality of duty. Anyway, both Fuller and Hart do not fully exclude morality from the law because the law is an obligation but not a desire.
Works Cited
Fuller, Lon. L. Morality of Law. US: Yale University Press, 1969.
Hart, Herbert, “Positivism and the Seperation of Law and Morals”. The Concept of Law, 1961.
The Trial, 1963, Orson Welles, Anthony Perkins. DVD.