abhijithajikumar Some people think it is better for a single legal system throughout the world. Others say countries should have their own law. Discuss both view and give your opinion.
All over the world, most nations have established their own legal systems. Many are of the view that these systems could be common for all the countries for better enforcement while other emphasis the need to preserve judicial autonomy. In my perspective, though both sides have valid arguments, some laws could be made uniform between nations but with some considerations.
A standardized law and order structure ensures dual benefits in both the implementation and enforcement. Not only this could make the citizens easy to abide to the laws but also aids the police in enforcing them. Moreover, if any amendment in the system happens in any country, then the same change would be reflected everywhere avoiding any ambiguity. This is particularly beneficial in today’s times where the migrations of people to other countries is on a rise, and a uniform system could support them to easily fit into any nation.
However, it is undeniable that each nation has its own political interests and governance that is reflected in their jurisdiction. The laws in all countries are currently framed with reference to their history, culture, policies as well as their regional and religious significance. Hence, there could be opportunities for an efficient system that respects the individuality of the nation. For instance, in India and Nepal, a basic human right like the freedom of speech have different contexts as the primer is a democracy while the other is a monarchy.
In conclusion, there is a widely held perception to have uniform laws all over the world rather than being discrete. Although both views have their own legitimate arguments, in my opinion, only those laws can be made common that do not affect the significance of the government of individual nations.
