Course: English for law and Interpretation of Statutes

Assignment Topic: Politics of Interpretation of Statutes

Tashmia Sabera
Assistant Professor
Department of law
Faculty of Security and Strategic Studies(FSSS)
Bangladesh University of Professionals
Submitted by

Name : Asif Mahmud

Roll no: 2042951009
Law-5
Section: A
Faculty of Security and Strategic Studies (FSSS)
Bangladesh University of Professionals
Assignment on

Politics of
INTERPRETATION OF
STATUTES
___

By Asif Mahmud

INTRODUCTION
In statutory interpretation politics plays a vital role, some times politics emerges in the judicial
community without the intention of engaging, since law and politics is interconnected, politics
plays a vital role in law. In this assignment, I will discuss about the politics that happens
regarding interpreting statutes.
 2

There is a widely shared assumption that the primary role of courts it to serve as “Faithful Agents”
of government in interpreting statutes -- that is to identify and enforce the legal directives that an
appropriately informed interpreted would conclude the enacting legislature meant to establish --
Most theories use this as their foundation, but differ on how to achieve this goal

Those who interpret the statutes usually use certain methodology to interpret the law. These
has been regarded as judicially traditional interpretation tools, these methodology arent
individually political, but interpreters with similar ideologies tend to use same kind of
methodologies.

1. Textualism
Textualism instructs judges to seek statutory meaning in the semantic import of the
enacted text.Textualism means interpreting the statute from what statute means , not
what the legislature means.In any society, Traditional or conservatives tend to use
textualism as a way to interpret the statutes. The point of textualism was to interpret the
law in the most non-political way, but the problem relies on the usage of it. Since two
groups of people use it differently or a group of people completely disregards it, it
creates a polarization, and from polarization comes politics. Textualism looks to the
ordinary meaning of the language of the text, but it looks at the ordinary meaning of the
text, not merely the possible range of meaning of each of its constituent words.
 3

2. Intentionalism

Ask what would the reasonable legislature have in mind instructs courts to implement
legislative intent even when that intent is not clear from the plain meaning of the text and is
discernible only through other sources. Intentionalism is also called original intent. Its kind of the
opposite of textualism. It is also called originalism or original intent. Unlike textualism the interpreters
interpret from what the legislature might have meant. They look for the background as well.
Textualism tends to make statutory interpretation an exercise in ingenuity—an attitude that may be
less conducive to deference to the decisions of other institutions than the dry archival approach
associated with intentionalism. It uses original intent as a an evidence to interpret the law.

3. Purposivism

Purposivism is a competitor for textualism. It looks for the purpose of a stature not the
intention or text. It prioritizes on the purpose of a statute.Just like textualism its an interpretive
theory.

Positive law vs natural law

Positivism is a law that is made by human beings. The word positive here does not denote “good”
per se. It is body of law, statutes enacted under a body of governance like state. Positive laws are
written by legislature, and there are penalties if the positive laws are broken. And its
typically enacted in a national level. Positivism differentiates between law and morality
Positive law is expected to be followed by everyone.Positive laws are applied by institutional
force and backed by punishment. They differ from unwritten moral codes, without any public
 4

publication.It only means to govern a society. Positive laws doesn't come from arbitrary
concepts, it has to be reasonable and rational. However,

positive law must be grounded in natural laws and not that positive laws must be grounded in
moral laws. Interestingly, often times good laws are grounded in rationalism, because
rationalism makes sure of efficiency. But an important quote shows the relationship between
natural and positive law

“Hobbes is content to interpret a law as an

authoritative command, whether human or divine. But
each command must be justified, and justification of
statute law consists in showing that it is merely an
application of natural laws.”

So even though both come from different school of thoughts, they are interconnected. In terms
of statutory interpretation , they are used in various ways.

Natural law however means.

The unwritten body of universal moral principles that underlie the ethical and legal
norms by which human conduct is sometimes evaluated and governed. Natural law is
often contrasted with positive law, which consists of the written rules and regulations
enacted by government. The term natural law is derived from the Roman term jus
naturale. Adherents to natural law philosophy are known as naturalists.

Naturalists believe that natural law principles are an inherent part of nature and exist regardless
of whether government recognizes or enforces them. Naturalists further believe that
governments must incorporate natural law principles into their legal systems before justice can
be achieved. There are three schools of natural law theory: divine natural law, secular natural
law, and historical natural law.

Some judges naturalist philosophy, where others positivist. Thomas hobbes, plato, immaneul
kant was pioneer naturalist philosophers whereas Jean jacques rousseaue was a positivist.
 5

Kantinian judges use natural law , where judges who follow rousseaue are positivists.

Conclusion
In conclusion, Politics and law is interconnected, and judgement and policy making, there is a
profound use of morality , and thats where politics and philosophy comes in. judges use judicial
interpretation to analyse a statute, a philosophy to give a judgement. They can come from
different school of thoughts but the goal is always to give justice. So therefore in statutory
interpretation politics is very important

References:
Gautherier, David. 2001. “Hobbes: The laws of Nature”. Pacific Philosophical Quarterly. 82(3-4): 258—284

Islam, mahmudul. “Interpretation of statutes”

Black, Henry Campbell, 1860-1927. Law dictionary. Published: St.