ISLAMIC UNIVERSITY IN UGANDA

FACULTY OF LAW

JURISPRUDENCE GROUP PRESENTATION

GROUP MEMBERS

1. BAKALIKWIRA JOEL 118-053011-18040

2. KATO JOSEPH 118-053011-18174
3. AJAI CARLYN 118-053011-17778
4. BABIRYE JANAT 118-053011-18018
5. MBIGITI MARTHA 118-053011-18344
6. JEMBA DEOGRATIOUS 118-053011-18318
7. KYABWE SHARON BEATRICE 118-053011-17845
8. ABDUKADIR YUSUF 118-053011-18511
9. MAGOMU IVAN 118-053011-17990
10. KAMBA AHMED. 118-053011 -18168

The sociological school of thought.

The sociological school of thought is concerned with sociology which is the science of social order and
progress. Sociology endeavors to discover and observe the patterns of behaviors of people in society.
The concept also endeavors to assess the needs of society and looks at the interests of different groups
in society .

The sociological approach .

The term sociology which was invented by conte (1798-1857) is the study of the behavioral patterns of
people in relation to their environment or surroundings. Within the purview of sociology law is regarded
as a social phenomenon which reflects human needs and aspirations. 1

The sociological school of law is a collection of academics and practitioners committed to the study of
law as a social phenomenon . In other words, sociological approach to jurisprudence is the study of law
in its social setting or as a social institution2 .

Roscue Pound explains that sociological movements in jurisprudence is ‘’a movement for pragmatism as
a philosophy of law for the adjustment of principles and doctrines to the human conditions they are to

1
Early thinkers and Comte( 2021 -feb 19)https://socialsci.libretexts.org/@go/page/7891

2
V.D Mahajan,Jurisprudence legal theory,5 th en.524
govern rather than to assume first principles or putting the human factors in the central place and
relegating logic to its true position as an instrument.’’ 3

Sociological perspective.

Sociologist employ three important concepts which to most legal theorists are alien. These are the ideas
of social structure, social stratification and social functions. The social structure suggests that in any
society there are a number of institutions legal, cultural, political, economic which form the social
structure and which interact in a variety of complex ways .Thus one institution or group may exert
greater political or economic influence than another hence the idea of social stratification which
includes problems of class conflicts and race discrimination. These institutions and groups may be
analyzed in terms of their particular social function. 4

Sociologists using these central ideas have sought to explain the nature and operation of law in society,
regard law as merely one feature of that society. They generally reject the idea that the can be a value
free explanation of law.

The sociologist of law is concerned to analyze and interpret the part played by law and legal
administration in effecting certain observable form of conduct or behavior. He or she will attempt to
present certain types of society in which the role or function of law may be examined.

The Historical Background .

The rise of this school of thought was largely influenced by the industrial revolution of the seventeenth
and eighteenth century 5. Apart from bringing industrial progress, the industrial revolution also brought
about inequalities such as exploitation of workers in industries, the main aim of an industry being
maximation of profits, workers were made to work for long hours for very little wages.

At the time of the industrial revolution the state was not involved in the private and social affairs of the
people.it was a laisses faire scenario that existed. However, the situation of inequalities reached a stage
at which it became unmanageable and the state would no longer watch from the site lines. It became
interested in matters of the welfare of the people and these included health, education and
employment conditions.

At this stage it was realized that the state would not promote the welfare of the people without the use
of the law. It was realized that society had capacity to change for the better through the instruments of
law.

What the sociological school of thought states.

3
Mechanical jurisprudence (1908)

4
Raymond Wacks,Understanding Jurisprudence.An introduction to Legal theory 3 rd edn,163

5
Tejas Vasani,sociological school of jurisprudence September 29,,2019
The sociological school of thought states that you develop the legal order which links into a certain type
of society. The law cannot be read outside the social context in which it operates.

The making of the law, the interpretation of the law and the application of the law should take into
account social factors.

Certain societal interests should be recognized and given legal interest. The law is an instrument for
serving the needs of society.

The real source of law is not the statutes or precedents as positivists say but the activities of the society
itself as the law is not immobile but rather dynamic and living. The major proposition of the sociological
school of thought is that the law in the books is different from the law in the field. 6

Where as the positivists are content with the law in the books, the sociological theorists assert that the
law in the field is most important. They argue that there should be a sociological study before the
passing of any law.

It is their contention that the lawyers’ function should not start with law books and end with court
decisions; lawyers should widen their perspective of society in order to be effective. 7

The emphasis by this school of thought is that one should not merely be content with what the law is,
one should access the kind of society he is in and suggest those which would serve the particular society
better.

Theories of the sociological school of thought.

Roscoe Pound (1870-1964 ) Social Engineering .

He is the leading exponent of the sociological jurisprudence .He lived a long and productive life, his
profolic output with its propensity for classification is to a large extent consolidated in his five volume
work jurisprudence which was published in 1959.Roscoe Pound published a lot of articles on sociological
jurisprudence. He stated that the sociological movement in jurisprudence is a movement in for
pragmatism as a philosophy of law for putting human factors in a central place and relegating logic of its
true place as an instrument.8

Pound emphasizes the importance of the distinction between law in books and law in action. His
purpose was not however confined to identifying the tension between the two but he wanted to show
how they would be harmonized. He sought in other words to make the latter conform to the former as

6
Roscoe Pound ,Interpretation od Legal theory

7
ibid

8
Raymond Wacks,Understanding Jurisprudence.An introduction to Legal theory 3 rd edn,
he put it in a conflict between the law in books and the national will there can be but one result “let us
not be legal monks ‘’

Social interest and jural postulates.

For Pound, the task of lawyers and legislators is social engineering. The law by identifying and protecting
certain interest, ensures social cohesion . An interest is defined as a demand or a desire which human
being either individually or groups or in relations seek to satisfy. It is legally protected by attributing the
status by legal right. The purpose of social engineering is to construct as efficient a society as possible
one that ensures the satisfaction of the maximum of interest of minimal fiction and waste of resources.
Pound’s elaborate theory of interests include;

1. Individual interests. This comprises of interests which pertain to someone’s personality such as the
physical person, freedom of will, health, honor and reputation, privacy and belief, domestic relations
and interests of substance, freedom of associations etc.

2. Public interests. he meant interests of society to be politically organized in order to maintain the
dignity of the society the protection of such society. These include interests of the state as juristic
persons.

3. social interests by this he meant peoples claims to peace and order and safety, security of acquisition
of property and social, economic and cultural progress.

Pound proceeds to examine the various legal means including the concepts of rights and duties by which
they are secured. He then argues that when interests conflict, they may be wide or balanced only
against other interest on the same plane, thus an individual interest must not be wide against a public
interest.

Pound also presents a classification of the institution of law, he distinguishes between rules, principles,
conceptions, doctrines and standards. The business of the law in pounds view consists in satisfying as
many interests as possible. But how are we to know whether new interests qualify for recognition? he
suggests that they may be testing the reference to certain jural postulates of civilization.

Critiques of Pound .9

Pounds objective classification of interests and accompanying jural postulates rads like a political
manifesto in favor of a liberal and capitalist society, it also rests on a consensus model of society in
which there is a considerable degree of share values. Many sociologists regard the conflict model as a
more accurate description of reality.

His model of competing interests pressing for recognition and security over looks the extent to which
law recognizes vested rights.

9
ibid
He assumes that it is a simple matter to know the real interests of people but we are manipulated to a
greater or lesser extent by advertising and other forms of persuasion

How do we actually set a about establishing people’s interests, is it a matter of psychology or market
research?

Should we in any event seek to satisfy peoples wants? There may be a good reason to protect certain
interests regardless of whether people want them for instance paternalistic legislation relating to
pornography or drugs.

Hi inventory seems almost irretrievably vague and nebulous. For instance, what even in these troubled
times of terror is to be accommodated by the social interest in peace and order.

Even if we regard the list as helpful, it raises a plethora of difficulties.is there really any fundamental
distinction between public and social interest? Is the difference between individual and social interests
not one between different types of interests as much as one between interests that exists on different
levels?

The idea of balancing not withstanding when it comes to a judge selecting between competing
interests ,each situation has a pattern of its own ,and a different type of interest and activities that may
be involved are infinitely various .it is for the judge to translate the activities involved in the case before
him in terms of an interest and to select the ideal with reference with while the competing interests are
measured.in other words the listing of interests is less important than the judicial attitudes towards
particular activities

Pound assumes that claims pre exist law but certain claims actually result from law for instance welfare
legislation.

What does it mean to recognize an interest? there is a gray area in which an activity maybe permitted
without being recognized by the law.

Pound establishes his jural postulates by generalizing a value which is already protected ,but if new
claims are as he proposes to be judged by reference to jural postulates ,they will be recognized only if
similar claims already receive legal protection .This hardly suggests a particularly dynamic process of law
reform.

Eugen Ehrlich (1862 -1922 )

Its suggested that there is a strong resemblance between pound’s law in action and Ehrlish’s idea of
living law. Ehrlish like pound recognized that the formal sources of law provide an incomplete picture of
what law is really like, the living law. This to be distinguished from norms of decision ( rules found in the
civil codes, judicial decisions and statutes ) which are the norms to be enforced by the courts when
parties resort to litigation .living law is the law which dominates life itself even though it has not been
posited in legal proposition .he says that to attempt to imprison the law over time or of a people within
the sections of a code is about as reasonable as to attempt to confine a stream within a pond. The water
that is put in a stream is no longer a living stream but a stagnant pool so example the law of contract is
better understood by empirical studies than by reading textbooks and judicial decisions ,this can be well
illustrated by the well known research conducted by Stewart Macaulle into commercial practices in
Wisconsin .he showed that instead of concerning themselves with the rules of offer and acceptance,
consideration etc, hardened businessmen were not only ignorant about the rules but found ways of
avoiding the law and lawyers whenever possible. “as one respondent put it, one does not run to lawyers
if he wants to stay in business because one must behave decently.”

Ehrlich declared that the center of gravity of legal development lies not in legislation or juristic science
nor in judicial decision but in society itself.it is the inner order of association not legal proposition that
determines the fate of man.10

The explanation for social phenomena comes not from the juristic construction but from inferring the
underlying modes of thought from fac. He argues is derived from social facts and the real source of the
law is the activities of the society itself. The sociology of law he argues must begin with the living law. By
the living law he meant the way people regulate themselves in their everyday life. 11

He criticized positivists for ignoring the activities and beliefs of people in society. He asked the question;
“how far is the formal law observed?”. He said, many disputes that affect individuals interse are
regulated by the living law and not the book law and court decisions. He also argues that the scope of
jurisprudence should be enlarged to concern itself with the study of society.to him the duty of legislative
and judicial authorities is to give effect to the living law.

Critique of Ehrlich .

Ehrlich failed to provide a coherent theory of the relationship between the living law and the state

David Nelken raises several difficulties with the very concept of the living law, what if anything does the
various norms of the living law relating to family, organizations and business activities, to what extend
do these organizations and associations reproduce to themselves Ehrlichs’ two types of law having both
living law and norms for decision. can groups and association be defined apart from the norms that
constitute them? Nelken sys that the answers to these questions depend on the development of the
sociology of norms rather than the sociology of law .Ehrlich failed to provide the answers to these
questions.12

10
Eugen Erlich,The fundamental Principles of sociology of Law(1936)

11
Eugen Erlich,The sociology of law’36 Harvard law Review 130

12
Raymond Wacks,Understanding Jurisprudence.An introduction to Legal theory 3 rd edn
Ehrlichs influence has not been inconsiderable and his ideas are described by Coterell as a powerful
challenge to lawyers to typical assumptions about the nature and scope of law and its importance.

Emile Durkheim (1858- 1917)

He was the founder of the French school of sociology and widely considered to be the father of
sociology. Durkheim wrote legal issues ranging from criminal process to the las of contracts his
contribution to sociological jurisprudence is in deniable his book division of labor in society, he deals
with issue of law in society. He asserts that law was the standard by which any society would be
evaluated since law reproduces the principal form of social solidarity.

Durkheim’s general concern simply stated as “what is it that holds society together?

Through throughout his major works especially the division of labor in society first published in 1833, he
is preoccupied with social solidarity and the law plays a central role in the transition from mechanical to
organic solidarity. It’s an external index that symbolizes the nature of social solidarity. He makes two
claims;

Firstly he argues that a society develops from religion to seculiarism from collection to individualism ,law
becomes less penal and more restitutive in character.

Secondly he claims that the function of punishment is an expression of collective sentiments by which
social cohesion is maintained.

To clarify his statement he makes a distinction of two types of search social solidarity; 13

1. Mechanical solidarity, To him this prevails in small scale homogeneous societies ,Durkheim
assumes that most laws in such societies would be of a penal and repressive nature since the
entire society would take an interest of criminal activities and would seek to suppress and deter
it. In short the focus of law in societies that form mechanical solidarity is more on criminal law
rather than civil law, and is more concerned with punishment and suppressing anti social
activities.
2. Organic solidarity

This is found in more heterogenous and differential societies where there is a greater division of labour
as well as greater difference between individual. This means that people advance in society based on
merit .in such societies there is less of a common societal reaction to crime as people come from many
different backgrounds and thus law becomes more repressive and more restitutive.

Law and social solidarity.

Durkheim also identifies an important relationship and mechanical solidarity and repressive law and
between organic solidarity and restitutive law. This is explained by reference to the features of these
13
Durkheim,E(1964),The Division of Labour in society
two forms of cohesion described above. Law in the former is essentially penal but with increasing
differentiation. disputes tend to be resolved by recourse to restitutive law which includes the civil law
procedural law and Major parts of constitutional and administrative law. 14

Durkheim treats law and morality as virtually synonymous ,law is derived from and is an expression of
societies moralities and in the absence of moral commitment to support it law ceases being a part of
society.

Functions of punishment.

For Durkheim crime is closely connected to the social values expressed in the collective conscience.an
act is criminal when it offends strong and defined steps of the collective conscience we must not say
that an action shocks a common conscience because its criminal but rather its criminal because it shock
the common conscience.

Crime is an inevitable feature of social life indeed it’s a factor in public health and integral part of all
health societies. And punishment is a crucial element of crime, the state acts to reinforce the collective
conscience but punishing those who offend against the state itself. Punishment is defined as a
passionate reaction of graduated intensity that society exercises through the medium of a body acting
upon those of its members who have violated certain rules of conduct. He is in no doubt that the
function of punishment is vengeance and that is a necessary act of defense.

Critique of Durkheim

Firstly, his account is too narrow, his treatment of law as a completely moral phenomenon neglects the
extent to which law and morality often conflict.

Secondly, his views of primitive societies as apriority and there is empirical evidence that tends to refute
his assumption that for example they lack a division of labour.

Thirdly his theory of law becomes restitutive does not in the view of several critics provides a coherent
account of this development.

In his explanation of the transition from mechanical to organic solidarity he gives no description. of the
intermediate stages between primitive and modern societies.

It has been argued by modern social scientists that contrary to Durkheims thesis repressive law was
actually less important in simple or primitive societies.

His concept of the state has been attacked, he regards the state as the expression of the collectivity .Its
treated merely as an instrumental organ or as a means by which offenders are punished

Durkheims’ insistence on reducing punishment to its retributive features has not met with critical
acclaim ,it is sometimes considered to ignore the different rehabilitative reformative aspects of
punishment.
14
Raymond Wacks,Understanding Jurisprudence.An introduction to Legal theory 3 rd edn
He neglects the punitive dimension of civil law and at the same time fails to account for the growing
intrusiveness of the criminal law into for example labor relations.

His suggestion that crime is a factor in public health has been defined by several writers who in general
find it inconveniencing on a number of grounds.

Finally, Durkheims’ two laws of evolution has been attacked on several accounts. In particular the basis
of the distinction between religious and human crimes haves been questioned on what ground. For
instance, are some acts are treated as attacks upon the collective while others are not .

Rudolf Von Jhering (1818 -1898 ) { law and social purpose }.

He is generally credited as being the father of sociological jurisprudence .Jhering’s theory of law bases
itself on social interests.to him ,law exists to serve social interests. Law according to Jhering “is the sum
of conditions of social life in the wildest sense of the terms as secured by the power of the state through
the means of external compulsion”15

According to him, just as a stone cannot be moved without any external force ,the human will cannot
operate without any specific purpose. He asserts that the purpose of the law is to protect interests.
Interest refers to the pursuit of pleasure and avoidance of pain .individual interest is partly affected by
social factors where in an individual takes the interest of the other people into account to Jhering ,law
strives to ensure individual good only as a means to an end and not an end in itself .the end is the
collective good or overall welfare of the society.

He was also of the opinion that law is not the only method to regulate society .there are other means
and methods as well. Within a society while there may be several aspects which exclusively fall within
the domain of law .there are certain aspects where in no legal intervention is required. He recognized
the coercive character of law which is why his approach is said to be a modern approach towards the
study of law.16

Max weber. (1864- 1920 ) legitimate authority.

He was a trained lawyer ,he devotes to the law a rigorous and systematic social and historical analysis
which occupies a central position in his general sociological theory. He is unquestionably the most
prominent and influential social theorist and it is not uncommon to find him revered by his
contemporary successors .he wrote a lot of books including economy and society .an outline of
interpretive sociology and max weber on law and society.

15
Von Jhering, R (1915),The struggle for Law Chicago; Callaghan

16
Von Jhering R(1913),Law as a means to an end, Chicago Callaghan
Essentially, Webers’ project was to explain the development of capitalism in western societies and the
key element in his explanation is the existence of a rational legal order. He employs certain legal types
along with the development of particular concepts of rationality to demonstrate the movement towards
capitalism. His starting point is the individual social action which can be understood only by reference to
its meaning, purpose and intention for the individuals .His sociology of law may be considered in three
sub headings ;

Typology of law Weber defines law as “an order to be called if its externally guaranteed by the
probability that coercion ,physical or psychological to bring about conformity or avenge violation will be
applied by a staff of people holding themselves specially for that purpose. his typology is based on the
various types of legal thoughts and rationality.He distinguishes between social system and substantive
system .the second distinction is between rational and irrational. These terms describe the manner in
which the material “rules, procedures are applied in the system .examples of the legal thoughts;

 Substantively irrational law. Weber calls this khadi justice ,(the procedure used in islam law)
where decisions are made adhoc based on ethical emotional and political considerations. cases
are decided on their own meri without reference to general principles.
 Substantively rational law. this is exemplified by certain theocratic legal systems an a patriarchal
system of justice which recognizes no separation of law an morals. there is some attempt to
construct a doctrinal system of rules and principles .
 Formally rational law .this is exemplified by the codes of civil law countries that are derived from
roman law.it is a gapless legal system which contains answers to all legal problems.
 Formally rational law, examples are to be found in primitive systems which employ trial by
ordeal or oracle. decision are made on the basis of tests beyond the control of human intellect.

Weber then proposes a second typology based on ;

 The mode of law creation.

 The formal qualities of the law so created.
 The type of justice attained.

He argues that the law passes through the following four phases ;

 Charismatic legal revelation through law prophets

 Empirical creation and finding of law by legal honoratories .
 Imposition of law by secular and theocratic powers .
 Systematized elaboration of flaw and professionalized administration of justice .

Legitimate dominataion . Webers attempt to explain why people are obliged to obey the law leads him
to draw his well known distinction between the three types of legitimate domination .

Traditional authority. this type of authority existed in consequence of the communities long habituation
to the concept of legitimacy based on tradition. Obedience of constituted authority was predicated not
on enacted laws but upon the belief that the rulers had an authority conferred by tradition. these were
geared towards giving transidental coverage to the conduct of rulers and in distant ancient past and
insulating their rulership from legal restriction .in so doing, rulers of the time in question were elevated
over and above ordinary citizens ,they were treated as gods or demi gods.

Charismatic authority. this the authority derived from the charisma gift of grace of an extra ordinary
person who sems to be vested with super human powers they were referred to as the messiah for
instance those people wo emerged out of the over throw of the old order were considered to have
charismatic authority because people believed in them to have charismatic authority to make things
happen for the benefit of the people. however these so called messiahs would not deliver because they
privileged their personal conduct over that of the generality and as such people lost faith in them and
the charisma vanished .the existing gap between expectation and fulfillment undermined and destroyed
the basis of the ruler charismatic authority.

Rational legal authority .this type of authority is impersonal. It is characterised by belief in the legality of
legislation. Obedience is gained neither by tradition nor charismatic authority but by virtue of the belief
in the legitimacy or validity of parliamentary/constitutional supremacy which regulates the way and
manner power is exercised amongst the arms of government and the rights and duties of government
and citizens. Weber noted that this type of authority guarantees certainty, predictability and stability
within which a law of contract develops. He therefore concluded that it is a fertile ground for the
development of a capital society.17

Capitalism and Law

Weber is commonly associated with the view that economic forces do not affect the law. He seeks to
show that law is affected only indirectly by economic circumstances .he conceives of law as being
relatively autonomous. He claims that generally it appears that the development of the legal structure
has by no means been pre dominately been determined by economic factors. Therefore to him, law is
fundamentally related to but not determined by economic factors. His argument may be summarized as
rational economic conduct is at the heart of the capitalist system. this rationalism is facilitated by
certainty and predictability of logically formally rational law. Therefore the presence of this type of law
assists but does not cause the advance of capitalism .he uses the example of England to prove hi thesis
that only where the law is systematized so as to ensure the predictability of economic relations can
capitalism develop.

Critique of weber.

Hunt identifies three problematic materials which weber poses for the sociology of law ,firstly his
treatment of the relationship between law and relation is restricted and even distorted by his reduction
of domination to the personal relationship between the ruler and the ruled.it leads him to view the
ideological form of the legal orders as the real form of legal or political relations .

17
Max Weber: Essays in sociology. Newyork, NY Oxford University Press
Webers’ analysis of the relationship between law and the bureaucratic state is distorted by his concern
of legitimacy this accords unwarranted primacy to this aspect of the political structure.

In his discussion, of the relationship between law and the economic order, weber adopts an excessively
empiricist view.

His sociology is sometimes considered to be incapable of answering many of the questions of modern
law thus lloyd asks how the problems of the contemporary rare state can be solved by reference to a
theory irreversibly committed to a model of capitalism tied to the laisses faire economy .

His concept of legal domination exhibits an unduly positivist view of law ,the highly complex ideological
elements of law must be analyzed in ways that cannot utilize the ideal type method, if conditions of
legitimacy are to be understood in relation to social change.

The sixth criticism is why should bureaucracy qualify as a type of domination. In this case of traditional
or charismatic leaders, its clear that they are dominating since no one has the authority to tell them
what to do, but bureaucrats almost by definition are told by someone what to do.

General criticisms on the sociological school of thought.18

It undermines individual interests. A fundamental problem in society is the constant conflict between
individual and society interests. The sociological school disregards individual interests as it supposes law
to be primarily applicable to society and not the individual for instance suppose a judge is deciding a
case of law the accused is viewed by everyone as guilty and society has already passed judgement on
them.in this case it the judges duty to view the facts and evidence objectively and decide accordingly.
The social interest on opinion should be of no importance to the judge, and if there is a lack of evidence
the accused must be set free. This shows that individual interest hold more interest in the eyes of law
than group identity.

The sociological school of law attempts to shift the focus of law to society, in turn undermining the
interests of the individuals which is often in contrast with the interest of the society. Social justice while
a noble idea cannot be the sole focus of law as individual justice is much more important to law.

Subjectivity of social ideals; according to the sociological school law should help society progress
towards an ideal but this poses two problems first of all who decides what direction a society can take
after all society is a combination of individual conflicting interests .for some homosexuality is a valid
sexual orientation while for others it’s a sin, which interests should prevail and should la be conscience
of every differing interest, a social ideal is a metar physical idea if law starts actively heading towards
these abstract ideals it ceases to be a definite science with objective rules and definite system of social
regulations .

Another problem is it is impossible to know the consequences of a social change, before hand and if law
becomes an active catalyst for it ,it might over press its boundaries before it becomes oppressive.

18
https://blog.ipleaders.in/sociological school of law
Therefore the law cannot be sole motivated by deriving social change as it’s a definite science which
seeks to impose objective rules and regulations of society.

Law cannot be a mere balance of interest . if society is made up of individual interest there are bound to
be disagreements ,social jurisprudence says that law should act as a mediator between these interests
trying to fulfill the needs of many people it can. This is in consonance with Bentham idea for the
greatest good for the greatest number and this is a principle law should abide by. But this assertion
assumes that law is an impartial overseer but we know that law is not free from opinion law has its own
ideas of justice and interprets liberty and fairness in its own way.

Law cannot balance all the interests in society it is objective and chooses as per its own biases and
standards of judgements ,what is lawful and what is not. Then for the idea that law is impartial and a
mitigate is flowed and inadequate.

The school of thought goes beyond the tenets of sociology, sociology is essentially a descriptive study of
social facts but sociological school of law delivers into jurisprudence which is the philosophy of law and
here the sociological school makes a lip into being a normative study directive and aspiring towards
something and actively trying to realise it.

Roscue Pound an influential thinker of the school regard sociological school as a jurisprudential
advocating for an involved active study of law .therefore it ceases to be a mere description of the
sociological perspective of law and becomes a normative study of law as a catalyst for social change.

The relevance of the sociological school of Jurisprudence.

Sine laws are an essential part of society, sociology helps law to better understand society for smoother
regulation and formation of laws.in so doing, law is important to regulate society. Norms ,customs,
traditions all come under the law if the law did not exist then the society would not be less than a
jungle. Therefore from the formation of the laws to the execution till their impact on society, everything
comes under the umbrella of sociology

The school emphasizes that law is a social control over ociety.to have a harmonious society ,one needs
to build laws. Social contract is therefore a component utilized by the administration which manages the
exercises of all people inside any general public, with the law being an immaculate illustration.

The sociological school of jurisprudence emphasizes the concept of law as a societal phenomenon.it
teaches that law and sociology both evolve around social relationships ,principles, social
controls ,commitments and desires coming from specific social status and connections between or
among people and society
Anything happening in the social lives of people liable to lawful control and legal explanations does have
likeness with the social hypothesis and frequently read like the social hypothesis.

In conclusion, the sociological school of law offers an alternative perspective towards understanding law
and has done great work to make law more relevant, contemporary and sensitive to the to the social
climate it operates in. Its merits are plenty, and its critics too don’t deny its utility ,but help in an
evolution of this school to a broader encompassing theory of understanding of law.

REFERENCE

Raymond Wacks, Understanding Jurisprudence

V.D Mahajan, Jurisprudence &Legal Theory 5thedn

Tejas Vasani, Sociological School of Jurisprudence

Roscoe Pound, Interpretation of Legal history

Von Jhering(1915),The Struggle for Law, Chicago

Durkheim (1964),The division of Labour in society

Eugen Ehrlich, The fundamental Principles of Sociology of Law (1936)

Eugen Ehrlich, The sociology of Law’36 Harvard Law Review 130

Max Weber ,Law on Economy and Society (1891)

Max Weber, Essays in Sociology, New York Oxford Press

Roscoe Pound ,Outlines of Lectures on Jurisprudence (1943)