Natural Justice

Natural Justice - How termed?

Audi alteram partem (According to Merriem Webster, audi alteram partem  means hear the otherside. Latin maxim "audi alteram partem") is a second  principle of natural justice. That means, "hear the other side". Different  judges defined natural justice in different terms and the different languages. Concept of the Natural Justice has been described as "substantial  requirements of justice" (Sir Robort P. Collier, speaking for the judicial  committee of Privy Council, used the phrase "the requirements of  substantial justice" while in Arthur John Specman vs. Plumstead District  Board of Works, 1884-85 (10) Appeal cases 229, 240, Earl of Salbourne, SC preferred the phrase "The substantial requirement of justice") and some  judges called it to be "fair play in action", or duty to act fairly. Once, the  British Court criticized as sadly lacking in precision and repelling this  statement, it was once said that concept of natural justice should at all  stages guide those who discharge judicial functions is not merely an  acceptable, but an essential part of the philosophy of the law. The said  principles are recognized, introduced and accepted as  "great humanizing principles" (Maneka Gandhi vs. Union of India). It was  said that they are vague and difficult to ascertain. The view that in modern  times opinions have sometimes been expressed to the effect that it is vague as to be practically meaningless is regarded as tainted by the perennial  fallacy. The aim is to secure justice or to prevent miscarriage of justice. 

They are defined as rules derived from God; reason or nature as distinct  from man made law. This expression natural law, or just naturale was  largely used in the philosophical speculations of the Roman jurists of the  antoine age and was intended to denote a system of rules and principles for  the guidance of human conduct which, independently of enacted law, or of  the systems peculiar to any people, might be discovered by the rational  intelligence of mankind would be found to grow out of and conform to his nature, meaning by that word his whole mental, moral and physical constitution. In ethics, it consists in practical universal judgments which  man himself elicits.

Natural justice is another name for commonsense justice. Rules of natural  justice are not codified canons. But they are principles ingrained into the conscience of man. Natural justice is the administration of justice in a  commonsense liberal way. Justice is based substantially on natural ideals  and human values. The administration of justice is to be freed from the  narrow and restricted considerations which are usually associated with a  formulated law involving linguistic technicalities and grammatical niceties.  It is the substance of justice which has to determine its form. (Canera Bank vs. VK Awasthy Appeal NO:  2300 of 2005 decided on 31.03.2005 by Honourable the Supreme Court of India)

Principles remain uncodified. Yet their application to administrative or quasi-judicial proceedings are not only indispensable, but considered to be a prime requirement. Professor H.R.Wade in his administrative law has said that "By developing the principles of natural justice the Courts have devised a kind of code of fair administrative procedure...thereby imposing a particular procedural technique on government departments and statutory authorities generally.. to require them to be exercised in a manner that is procedurally fair...Procedure is not a matter of secondary importance." There imposed a clog on discretion in that it cannot be exercised arbitrarily without regard to natural justice . And the Courts said that there would be no decision within the meaning of the statute, if there were anything of that short done contrary to the essence of justice. And Byles says although there are no positive words in a statute requiring that party shall be heard, yet the justice of the common law will supply the omission of the legislature.