AN EXAMINATION OF KARL OLIVECRONA'S LAW AS FACT

Abstract

This paper examines Karl Olivecrona's Philosophy of law. He conceived law as a social fact and, therefore, value – neutral, thus denying any efficatory link with any metaphysical or moral ideals. However, the paper argues, contrary to Olivecrona's ideas, that laws are not entirely a human creation. It holds that there are human laws, as well as law of reason, both of which complement each other in the affairs of men. Using the evaluative method, the paper refutes Olivecrona's conception of law as fact, given the cheap and arrogant usurpation of positive laws by the sovereign. It compares the positivists' idea of law with the command theory and maintains that the positivists' lack of homogeneity of thought reveals its dependence on natural law. The paper argues that since natural law is universal and unchangeable, it is superior and foundational to positive law and provides the basis for the veracity and validity of human laws. The paper concludes that there is no human law outside and independent of the immutable law of reason because the justification or otherwise of human laws are dependent upon their conformity to the law of nations, the natural law.