Skip to main content

Public opinion and democracy

 PUBLIC OPINION AND DEMOCRACY

The foundation of term 'public opinion' is shrouded in obscurity. The Greeks and the Romans used parallel expressions. The Romans, but, treated consensus populi in juridical feel as distinguish from present political context. additionally, the proverb "Vox populi, vox Dei" had won currency at some stage in the center a long time. in the Discourses Machiavelli, too, in comparison the voice of the people to the voice of God. The phrase public opinion in its present which means because the organization for the conditioning of public policy was brought later into the vocabulary of the European politics thru France. Jean Jacques Rousseau changed into possibly first to use it at the eve of French Revolution. nowadays, the literature of democracy symbolizes in reality the explanation of political behavior in terms of public opinion. to quote MacIver, "This incessant pastime of popular opinion is the dynamic of democracy

The role of public opinion in a democracy is of precise importance on grounds. in the first location, while unfastened play of opinion is confident, the complete system acts as a check on the overgrowth of strength. a government, something be its shape, is, after all, an employer of power. Democracy is prominent from other forms of authorities with the aid of the truth that its miles built on the assumption of diffusion of strength rather than its awareness in one center. Its capabilities excellent when, as Mannheim expresses, a balance within the structure of the network is secured, by means of permitting reviews to complete peacefully and freely, a democratic shape strives, because it has been, to set a thief to trap a thief. It ensures an interlocking system wherein no strength institution can capture a possibility to outbid others and exert undue strain at the authorities. in which thru coercion or callousness, opinion turns into paralyzed, the situation spells a risk for democracy. here, 'eternal vigilance is the price of liberty'; the watchful citizen would communicate, following burke 'whilst I'm able to obey punctually, I'm able to censure freely.'

So, the opinion between people and the actual theory that we are improving here is less. It is preferred to as less practical in the actual life.

This brings us to the second crucial function discharged via public opinion in a democracy. while law will become a mirrored image of public opinion, it gives an easy technique to the problem of political duty. The citizens obey the law, because it rests on their will to obey. The entire technique of lawmaking serves to obliterate the distinction between the law-giver and the law- receiver. to quote Macler, "when opinion is free to determine government, coverage isn't of the acquiescence that submits to force, however of lively consent. the level of power is thereby raised and different dreams than people who rely upon force are given a better valuation. To make opinion the premise of government is to appeal to cause- whether or not you win or lose. it's far to expect a commonplace accurate - whether or now not your thought of it prevails."
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Section 58B of The Advocates Act - Special provision relating to certain disciplinary proceedings

 Section 58B The Advocates Act Description (1) As from the 1st day of September, 1963, every proceeding in respect of any disciplinary matter in relation to an existing advocate of a High Court shall, save as provided in the first proviso to sub-section (2), be disposed of by the State Bar Council in relation to that High Court, as if the existing advocate had been enrolled as an advocate on its roll. (2) If immediately before the said date, there is any proceeding in respect of any disciplinary matter in relation to an existing advocate pending before any High Court under the Indian Bar Councils Act, 1926 (38 of 1926), such proceeding shall stand transferred to the State Bar Council in relation to that High Court, as if it were a proceeding pending before the corresponding Bar Council under clause (c) of sub-section (1) of section 56: Provided that where in respect of any such proceeding the High Court has received the finding of a Tribunal constituted under section 11 of the Indian B
Post a Comment
Read more

Case Laws related to Defamation in favour of ClaimantCase Laws related to Defamation in favour of Claimant. TOLLEY Vs, J.S FRY & SONS LTD – (1931) Facts The defendants were owners of chocolate manufacturing company. They advertised their products with a caricature of the claimant, who was a prominent amateur golfer, showing him with the defendants’ chocolate in his pocket while playing golf. The advertisement compared the excellence of the chocolate to the excellence of the claimant’s drive. The claimant did not consent to or knew about the advertisement. Issue The claimant alleged that the advertisement suggested that he agreed to his portrait being used for commercial purposes and for financial gain. He further claimed that the use of his image made him look like someone who prostituted his reputation for advertising purposes and was thus unworthy of his status. At trial, several golfers gave evidence to the effect that if an amateur sold himself for advertisement, he no longer maintained his amateur status and might be asked to resign from his respective club. Furthermore, there was evidence that the possible adverse effects of the caricature on the claimant’s reputation were brought to the defendants’ attention. The trial judge found that the caricature could have a defamatory meaning. The jury then found in favor of the claimant. Held The House of Lords held that in the circumstances of this case – as explained by the facts – the caricature was capable of constituting defamation. In other words, the publication could have the meaning alleged by the claimant. The Lords also ordered a new trial limited to the assessment of damages. NEWSTEAD V LANDON EXPRESS NEWSPAPER LTD, (1939) Facts: A newspaper published a defamatory article about Harold Newstead. However, another person with this name brought an action in libel. He claimed that the article had been misunderstood as leading to him. The defendant newspaper recognised that they published the article. Also, they denied that they had the intention of being defamatory of him. Consequently, the claimant argued that the newspaper was under a duty. The duty was to give a clear and complete description of the correct person. Moreover, the claimant argued that the defendants were in breach of the duty. Issues: The issue in Newstead v London Express Newspaper, was if the reasonable persons would have understood the words complained of to refer to the plaintiff. Held: The Court of Appeal stated that in accordance with the current law on libel, liability for libel does not depend on the intention of the defamer; but on the fact of the defamation. Accordingly, a reasonable man, in this case a newspaper publisher, must be aware of the possibility of individuals with the same name and must assume that the words published will be read by a reasonable man with reasonable care.

  Case Laws related to Defamation in favour of Claimant.  TOLLEY  Vs,  J.S FRY & SONS LTD – (1931) Facts The defendants were owners of chocolate manufacturing company. They advertised their products with a caricature of the claimant, who was a prominent amateur golfer, showing him with the defendants’ chocolate in his pocket while playing golf. The advertisement compared the excellence of the chocolate to the excellence of the claimant’s drive. The claimant did not consent to or knew about the advertisement.   Issue The claimant alleged that the advertisement suggested that he agreed to his portrait being used for commercial purposes and for financial gain. He further claimed that the use of his image made him look like someone who prostituted his reputation for advertising purposes and was thus unworthy of his status. At trial, several golfers gave evidence to the effect that if an amateur sold himself for advertisement, he no longer maintained his amateur status and might be aske
1 comment
Read more

Rules as to delivery of goods

                             Rules as to delivery of goods Section 2(2) of Sale of Goods Act defines ‘delivery’ as a ‘voluntary transfer of possession from one person to another.’ Thus, if the transfer of goods is not voluntary and is taken by theft, by fraud, or by force, then there is no ‘delivery. Moreover, the ‘delivery’ should have the effect of putting the goods in possession of the buyer. The essence of the delivery is a voluntary transfer of possession of goods from one person to another. There is no delivery of goods where they are obtained at pistol point or theft. 1. Mode of Delivery: According to Section 33, delivery of goods sold may be made by doing anything which the parties agree shall be treated as delivery or which has the effect of putting the goods in the possession of the buyer or of any person authorized to hold them on his behalf. Delivery of goods may be actual, symbolic or constructive. 2. Expenses of Delivery: According to Section 36(5), unless otherwise agree
Post a Comment
Read more