Evaluation of Red light, green light, and amber light theories of

administrative law

Written by:
Srujith Krishna
Third Year LLB Student
O. P. Jindal Global University

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=4138171

 Abstract

The concept of red light green light theory was first raised by Carol Harlow and Richard
Rawling in 1948 and it is one of the theories of rule of law. Rule of law is a simple fundamental
principle of administrative law. This theory was introduced to assess administrative law with a
motive to stop the abuse of power. The red light theory mainly focuses on the control of powers
that are vested with the government and places judicial control on top. In the green light theory,
the state acquires a broader role and has larger power and allows state interventions. This theory
puts political emphasis on top of than judiciary. Most legal systems in all the countries are a
combination of both these theories. For governance to be recognized as righteous it should be
something in between these two theories and this type of governance is popularly known as the
amber light theory. All these theories have their own merits and demerits and in this paper, we
will be evaluating these theories.

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=4138171

 Introduction:

Laws that govern the administrative acts are known as administrative laws and the red light
green light theory is one among the theories of laws that makes administration more efficient.
According to 1(Dicey, 1889) administrative law is a combination of rights and liabilities of
individuals in terms with officials which specifies the procedure through which the vested
rights are being enforced. The case of 2(Marbury v. Madison, 1803) is the first case that should
the judicial supremacy and later it was recognized in many other countries to date. In this paper
we will get into the depth of these school of thoughts and analyse their values.

Red Light Theory:

This theory is likely to be originated from political tradition when the industrial revolution
existed in the 19th century which advocated laissez fair theory. This theory was mainly to
minimize the excessive intervention by the government. It basically doesn’t trust states and ss
per this theory, wider power to the government leads to the non-existence of rights and liberty
of the citizens and that is the reason why this theory intends to control the matters by courts
where courts and law are considered to be the supreme. According to the article 3(Dhital, 2020),
the concept of legal sovereignty is a reflection of the red light theory because the government
must function as per the legitimate rules and regulations laid by the parliament. I support this
statement because in legal sovereignty there must be a body that commands and where people
can appeal. It basically restricts individuals or groups from acting beyond the scope of the law.
I also feel administrative law is bound to control the state activities which will protect private
rights. In the case of 4(Indira Gandhi v. Raj Narain, 1975) the 39th amendment included the
election of the Prime Minister in the 9th schedule making it free from judicial scrutiny. This
clearly shows us that the state wanted to protect their leader and made the amendment as per
their wish which is a clear abuse of power by the government. The Supreme Court in this case
rightly ascertained that the 39th amendment was unconstitutional. If this case was in favour of
the government it would have led to state intervention and we can clearly forecast that there
would arise a situation of tyranny and corruption.

1
A. V. Dicey, Introduction to the Study of the Law of the Constitution, MacMillan & Co, Third Edition, 1889
2
Marbury v. Madison 5 U.S. 137 (1803)
3
Anjana Dhital, Red, Green and Amber light theories of administrative law, IPLEADERS, (November 04,
2020) https://blog.ipleaders.in/red-green-amber-light-theories-administrative-law/#_ftn7
4
Indira Gandhi v. Raj Narain AIR 1976 (2) SCR 347

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=4138171

 Green Light Theory:

This theory mentions that one person holding power can be problematic. It says more than
individual rights there must be collective rights and for that state must convert into absolutist
at the same time it must be made sure that collectivism is always promoted and the well-being
of the people is at its peak. This theory is basically a counter to the red light theory. According
to 5(Stott & Felix, 1997) green light theory may also be known as a functionalist theory which
shows a positive approach toward the states. According to this theory, the law is just a mere
matter of political discussion and administrative law must not focus only on diminishing
negative practices by the government but, should also focus on facilitating the administration.
I feel this theory has evolved from the utilitarian theory because philosophers such as Jeremy
Bentham and John Stuart Mill have advocated that an action is right if an action promotes
happiness and wrong if it brings happiness. Hence, the fundamental objective of green light
theory is to limit the influence of courts over administration because courts are seen as a barrier
to administrative growth because of their legal values.

Amber Light Theory:

The theory is a balance between red light and green light theory which follows the middle path.
It doesn’t rebut the rigidity of the red light theory but, they argue that excessive transparency
can also lead to higher problems. Everything must not be transparent to the public because
some things may be very sensitive in nature which may lead to internal disruptions. The theory
also suggests that law is superior to politics and politics must always be lower compared to the
law. Hence, we can say from this theory that a state can be successfully limited by the judiciary
and the judiciary must equally allow for a proper administration. The goal of this theory is to
save human rights in a particular vision. I feel that human rights need to be adhered but at the
same time, state security must also be paramount.

5
David Stott & Alexandra Felix, Principles of administrative law, Cavendish Publishing Limited, London,
United Kingdom, 1997.

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=4138171

 Evaluation:

This theory was acknowledged by many countries such as India and Canada which raised
critical questions throughout the world. One of the questions was regarding the role of law and
the function of the judiciary. I feel the laws are created to create moral standards and promote
public policies which facilitate internal peace for the society. The judiciary on the other hand
acts as an intermediator between law, people and administration. I also feel the judiciary plays
an important role as they have the capacity to interpret laws and apply them to the factual
circumstances and decide the disputes. Interpreting the statutes is one of the key functions that
is given to the judiciary to apply the law in different cases.

The second question was regarding whether the courts can be primarily responsible for
administration. I feel that for a proper administration there should be something above the
government to constantly monitor their acts. According to the article 6(Said, 2020) no one is
above law, which means no person or government or its officials is above the law and the law
enforces government it is the duty of the courts to adhere to the law without bias. Hence, we
can ascertain that courts are above administration making them primarily responsible for the
proper running of the administration.

Since one theory completely goes in favour of the judiciary and the other theory completely
goes in favour of the government and the question arose as to who must have the ultimate
power? I feel both government and judiciary must have certain powers to fulfil their duties.
The red light theory predicts that if the ultimate power is vested with the government then there
is a high probability that the public bodies and executive authorities will act beyond their
powers and judicial intervention comes to the rescue. The green light theory says that judicial
intervention minimises the efficiency of administration. Pertaining to this question, I would
suggest that the amber light theory be followed because I feel that the best way to control a
state is by judicial interventions and if the state is above law they could easily mend the law
according to their wish which would cause serious difficulties for the people.

6
Mark Said, No one is above the law, TIMES MALTA, (February 1, 2022),
https://timesofmalta.com/articles/view/no-one-is-above-the-law-mark-said.931456

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=4138171

 Difference between the theories and their analysis:

As we have eloquently discussed the different theories now let us discuss the difference
between these theories.

 The red light theory views judicial review as a means for regulating administrative
actions, whereas the green light theory recognises that judicial review is sometimes
necessary solely to facilitate administrative actions.

 The green light theory ascertains judicial control as an obstacle to the running of the
administration whereas the red light theory considers judicial control over
administration for the administration to run efficiently.

 The red light theory is congenial to the intervention by courts whereas the green light
theory questions the courts intervention in checking the executive actions.

 The green light theory considers law to be something that stops administration whereas
the red light theory lays everything on the courts and rule of law.

The aim of administrative law is to keep the government under rigorous supervision and to
ensure that all the rights of citizens are protected. All these theories have been proposed at
different times to identify the goals of administrative law. According to 7(Franklin, 2018) in
society, their laws are a set of rules and regulations that determine a system of do’s and don’ts
in the society, as well as the institutions that legislate and enforce the laws. Similarly, for a
proper administration, the government must act according to the law that determines the do’s
and don’ts.
The red light theory wants administrative law to be strict and aims to keep the government
under immense control. The green light theory contrary to the red light theory considers that
when public administration is held under strong judicial control, it cannot function effectively
but, it does not deny the role of law completely. The amber light theory supporting both the

7
Robert Franklin, The Red Light Theory and The Green Light Theory Portray Contrary Views as to the Extent
and Object of Administrative law, THE LAWYERS AND JURISTS, (February 27, 2018),
https://www.lawyersnjurists.com/article/the-red-light-theory-and-the-green-light-theory-portray-contrary-views-
as-to-the-extent-and-object-of-administrative-law-2/

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=4138171

theories considers that there is no clear winner among the theories and the goal of
administrative law should be to take the best parts of both theories and apply them to the
governmental framework.

Conclusion:

Administrative law is concerned with the operation and management of administrative

authorities and deals with the methods to be followed in exercising their functions and duties.
In the judgement of 8(A.K. Kraipak v. Union of India, 1970) the court held that every provision
of the Constitution flows like a golden thread through it, and it is undeniably one of the
fundamental aspects that demands every instrument of the state to behave within the bounds of
powers provided by the law. I conclude by telling that to protect individual liberties the law
must act supreme and prevail above the government and there must be some sort of limitation
to the administrative powers to avoid any possible misuse or abuse of such abilities hence, the
supremacy of law is required for control the administration.

8
A.K. Kraipak v. Union of India AIR 1970 SC A

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=4138171