NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF STUDY AND

RESEARCH IN LAW

PRINCIPLE OF CONSENT WITH RESPECT TO POLITICAL

OBLIGATION- JOHN LOCKE
SUBMITTED BY:
AMAN YUVRAJ CHOUDHARY
SEMESTER 2, B.A.LL.B.(HONS.) ROLL.NO. : 1153
UNDER THE GUIDANCE OF AND TO DR. NARENDRA NAROTTAM
 DECLARATION

I do hereby acknowledge that the academic efforts done for the research work titled
“Principle Of Consent With Respect To Political Obligation- John Locke” for the course of
Political Science Semester 2, National University Of Study And Research In Law, Ranchi is
the sole product of my effort which has been done under the supervision of Dr.Narendra
Narottam.

I have truthfully appreciated and acknowledged the sources used for the purpose of this
research activity. As per my mind, this work is free from any sort of plagiarism.

I do hereby acknowledge that the academic efforts done for the research work titled
“Principle Of Consent With Respect To Political Obligation- John Locke” for the course of
Political Science Semester 2, National University Of Study And Research In Law, Ranchi is
the sole product of my effort which has been done under the supervision of

I have truthfully appreciated and acknowledged the sources used for the purpose of this
research activity. As per my mind, this work is free from any sort of plagiarism.
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

I, Aman Yuvraj Choudhary, express my gratitude to our professor Dr. Narendera

Narottam for he allotted me an intriguing topic to research upon and valuable guidance and
remarkable insight to follow it up.

This has been an opportunity to learn rather than just being a task and one that has
benefitted me.

The research tools and infrastructure provided by our university have been of immense
help.

Further, I thank my Mom and my Grand-Mom for providing me with a learning

conducive environment. Even further, my seniors and my colleagues have been there and
deserve thanks.

I, Aman Yuvraj Choudhary, express my gratitude to our professor Dr. for he allotted
me an intriguing topic to research upon and valuable guidance and remarkable insight to follow
it up.

This has been an opportunity to learn rather than just being a task and one that has
benefitted me.

The research tools and infrastructure provided by our university have been of immense
help.

Further, I thank and my Grand-Mom for providing me with a learning conducive

environment. Even further, my seniors and my colleagues have been there and deserve thanks.

-Mom for providing me with a learning conducive environment. Even further, my

seniors and my colleagues have been there and deserve thanks.
 INTRODUCTION

The concern of a political scientist is not only confined to the study of authority, but also
extends to the problem of power being acceptable to the people over whom it is exercised. A
study of the concept of political obligation necessarily leads to an investigation of related
terms—political legitimacy and revolution. While the concept of political obligation constitutes
an important touchstone of political philosophy, it finds a significant place in association with
the notions of legitimacy and effectiveness. After this, we pass on to the study of the idea of
revolution. In this unit, we propose to examine the relationship between a legitimate political
order and an enlightened citizenship, which would make clear the concepts of political
obligation and revolution

In politics, there is a bond between a man as a citizen and the authorities which seek to regulate
him. A man is expected to perform various acts for the governing body. It is his political
obligation1 that requires him to take commands from the authority, under which he lives. The
problem that now arises with political obligation is how far, when, and why is an individual
obliged to obey the laws of political authority. While navigating through this region, one comes
across political philosopher John Locke’s theories, whose views accounts to be one of the most
gripping perspectives on this topic, and would also be discussed in the further course of this
article.

NATURE, ORIGIN AND CHARACTERISTICS OF POLITICAL OBLIGATION

The term ‘obligation’ originates from a Latin word ‘obligate’ implying something that binds
men to perform what is enjoined upon them. This has various connotations. In the realm of
ethics, it informs a man to discharge his duties, which he accepts on the basis of his rational
understanding. In the field of jurisprudence, the social life of men is regulated by law. And in
the world of politics, man is bound to live under some authority and obey his command. This
is based on the maxim of common prudence. It follows that the case of political obligation rests
upon issues relating to the nature of authority that involves within its fold the whole world of
existing rights, laws, and political organization generally.

1
Originates from the Latin word ‘obligate’; implies something that binds men to an engagement of performing
what is enjoined.
Political obligation is, thus, a frame through which people accept the commands of the “men
in authority”. This means that it has certain distinct characteristics.

They are:

1. Management of public affairs

2. Political Legitimacy
3. Resistance to authority

A study of these characteristics would enable us to understand the nature of political obligation
more clearly.

MANAGEMENT OF PUBLIC AFFAIRS

The art of running any government is not easy. It is a difficult and extensive task and any wrong
move or incorrect policy decision would entail serious consequences. On the contrary, a
positive and right step taken by the government for the people would bring good results for the
development of a nation. Thus, it becomes a duty of every conscientious person to take serious
interest in the management of public affairs, government policies and political questions. This
interaction would be for the general good. Political obligation, thus, calls for honesty, integrity
and public spirit, both on the part of the government and the people.

POLITICAL LEGITIMACY
A study of the concept of political obligation necessarily leads to the investigation of the related
theme of political legitimacy and effectiveness. The stability of a democratic political system
not only depends upon economic development, but also upon its legitimacy. Legitimacy
includes the capacity to produce and maintain a belief that the existing political institutions or
forms are the most appropriate for society and is said to rest on the general will. Effectiveness,
on the other hand, is judged on how well a system performs the basic functions of government,
measured by the reaction of the masses.

RESISTANCE TO AUTHORITY
The idea of political obligation not only tells people to obey authority, but also desires them to
be critical about the way authority is exercised. The people should scrutinize the action of their
rulers and resist an invasion on their liberties. Thus, the idea of political obligation also involves
the idea of resistance to authority. But of course, the right to protest against the state must be
founded on a relation to social well-being in terms intelligible to the masses and the
consequences of disobedience should not lead to a total breakdown of the state system
EXPLANATION OF JOHN LOCKE’S PRINCIPLE OF CONSENT’ WITH RESPECT TO POLITICAL
OBLIGATION

Some theorists give much privilege to the idea of consent. They regard it as being the ultimate
source of political obligation. They suggest that if a man is born free, then he should be
supposed to obey a ruler with his/her consent only (implicit or explicit).

Though the idea of contract or consent as a basis of obligation is quite ancient and is found in
ancient Hindu thought too, it was mainly in the 16th and the 17th century in Europe that
sophisticated theories of contract were developed to explain political obligation. The explicit
expression of this theory is found in the writings of Thomas Hobbes and John Locke. They
opine, that men who lived in the state of nature entered into a contract whereby political
authority came into being, which again was based on the consent of the people. The idea of
social contract, however, took a highly philosophical form at the hands of Rousseau, who
reposed the fact of political obligation in the “General Will”. This meant that man no longer
remains a slave to his impulses of appetite after entering into a civil society, but he becomes
bound to obey the law of the general good. (Called General Will). Thus, the social contract
theory justifies the conception that the ruling authority, if he has to be legitimate, must rest
ultimately on the consent of the governed. If the government violates the terms of the contract,
the people have the right to resist. The implications of this theory have been in the direction of
safeguarding the rights and liberties of the people and checking the arbitrariness of rulers

The theory of social contract best expresses this idea. Social contract constitutes the way of
reaching an agreement for forming up a state. The contract marks a shift from the state of nature
to a civil society and, thus, lays down the basis and limits of political obligation. The state of
nature, in moral and political philosophy, religion, social contract theories and international
law, is the hypothetical life of people before the societies came into existence. Locke's
picturization of the state of nature was not a sombre one. He considers man to be a rational
being who is inclined to follow the rules of morality. Civil society, according to him, was just
built to do away with few law-breakers who could not be made the judge in their own case.

The government in Locke's theory was formulated to protect the citizens' rights of life, liberty,
and property. It could be any time dissolved if it fails to achieve its purpose. Citizens under
Locke’s conceptualization held power to rebel against any form of tyranny. He focuses on
individual consent as a mechanism-based upon which societies are formed, and individuals
unite with such societies. Consent is the proper condition for political legitimacy. Government
by consent is the best mode of government. The characteristics and conditions of consent are,
thus, crucial. Consent-based theories of legitimacy and obligation generally agree that
consenting parties should be rational creatures, competent in understanding of moral categories
such as right and wrong.

People will no doubt disagree about the substance, scope, and demands of reason and morality.
Still, it is nonetheless necessary to at least grasp such distinctions, so as to give consent some
meaning and purpose. And for consent to confer any obligation, it must meet certain conditions,
i.e., the consenting parties must be adequately informed about the terms they are consenting to
and their consent must be freely given without any coercion or undue influence.

While some of the duties are bestowed upon everyone, few special obligations can only come
about when one voluntarily undertakes them. Locke's mentions that one becomes a full member
of a society by an act of explicit consent only. However, in reality, a handful of people can be
said to have actually consented to their governments, so no, or almost no, governments are fully
legitimate.2 This conclusion is problematic since it is contrary to Locke’s intention.

Locke's, hence, evolves the solution to this problem with his doctrine of tacit consent. He asserts
that if anyone accepts the perks given by the government, he has tacitly consented to the
burdens that the government imposes on him. 3

While walking along the highways of a country, a person gives tacit consent to the government
and agrees to obey that particular government’s instructions; children, when they accept their
parents' property, consent to the jurisdiction of the country over that property. These were just
few of the many examples of tacit consent. 4

This can be explained further as when a person came to acquire property according to Locke’s
theory of just acquisition (by mixing his labor with it), and entered a civil society by consent,
he agrees to be under its laws. It would be irrational for him to leave his property out of the
society and not subject himself to the laws. After all, the property is his because it is a part of
himself, his labor is invested in it. Therefore, his joining the society would imply that the
property came with him. Then, when the original owner of the property dies and wills the

2
Tuckness, A. (2016, January 11). Locke's Political Philosophy. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/locke-political/.
3
Greenwood, B. (1995, January 1). Tacit Consent: A Quiet Tyranny: Bowen Greenwood. FEE Freeman Article.
https://fee.org/articles/tacit-consent-a-quiet-tyranny/.
4
Ibid
property to his son, that son lives and enjoys on the same land, that has already been put under
the state's jurisdiction. So, by living there and not leaving, he grants his tacit consent to the
state’s claim to make laws for him.

Though the consent theory had its field day in the seventeenth and the eighteenth centuries and
even now, has its own significance on account of constituting the moral basis of a democratic
order, its suffers from certain weaknesses. The theory makes the state an artificial organization.
Also, the element of consent as enshrined in some contract made in a hypothetical state of
nature is nothing else than a fiction, not at all legally binding on the existing generation. Thus,
the people may go to the extent of staging a rebellion on the plea that they withdraw their
consent in as much as the government has committed such an action in violation of the “general
will’. The result is that the theory of political obligation is converted into a theory of rebellion.
 CONCLUSION

Contractual models, we see, have come to describe a wide variety of relations and interactions
between persons, students, teachers, authors, readers, clients and lawyers.

Given this, it would not be easy to estimate the effect that social contract theory would hold,
both within the subject of political philosophy and the wider culture. It will undoubtedly be
with us for the future. But so, will be the critiques of such theory, which will continue to force
us to think, analyse the nature of both ourselves and our relations with one another, and make
us question the nitty-gritties of such principles as the principle of consent, laid down by John
Locke.5

Contractual models, we see, have come to describe a wide variety of relations and interactions
between persons, students, teachers, authors, readers, clients and lawyers.

Given this, it would not be easy to estimate the effect that social contract theory would hold,
both within the subject of political philosophy and the wider culture. It will undoubtedly be
with us for the future. But so, will be the critiques of such theory, which will continue to force
us to think, analyse the nature of both ourselves and our relations with one another, and make
us question the nitty-gritties of such principles as the principle of consent, laid down by John
Locke.

5
The Social Contract. Accessed August 1, 2020. https://give2attain.blogspot.com/2018/04/the-
socialcontract.html.