The Crisis of Natural Law

Published: July 7, 2022

By: Tweety Marifin Piolo, BA in Political Science

Cicero believed that civil law must shape itself under the natural law of divine reason. Law is spread through the whole human community, unchanging, and eternal, calling people to their duty by its commands and deterring them from wrongdoing by its prohibitions. If the civil law does not conform to the commands of nature, Cicero argued that, by definition, the former cannot be truly considered a law, as true law is “right reason in harmony with nature.”

Since we derive justice from humanity’s nature and man’s relationship to his environment, anything contrary to this cannot be called true law. Furthermore, he postulated that the state exists to uphold laws that are in harmony with the universal principles of nature. For him, the law is more than just force; it is right reason in agreement with nature.

But Cicero’s suggestion that the State’s civil law should be based on natural law may be fraught with reasonable disagreements. One of the problems of natural law theory is that people interpret nature differently. There are specific things that a person considers natural but is not on the other.

For example, the issue of homosexuality has always been the crux of the debate between the Church and secular society. Some religious sects do not accept the LGBTQ community because it is theoretically inconsistent with the natural order of things. If we will pattern our civil laws after natural law, does it mean that we should not promulgate laws preserving the rights of homosexual people?

In Brunei Darussalam, a law was passed criminalizing homosexuality. The country is introducing strict new Islamic laws that make anal sex and adultery punishable by stoning to death. The new measures also cover a range of other crimes including punishment for theft by amputation. The move has sparked international condemnation. Homosexuals who are not from this country felt unsafe and threatened. Brunei's gay community has expressed shock and fear at the "medieval punishments." Brunei may aptly argue that the passage of the law conforms to their interperation of natural law. However, the same argument has also jeopardized the right to life of homosexuals in their country.

The legislators of Brunei have been very committed to their religion that even their civil laws are patterned after natural law. With their utmost commitment to their divine and natural laws, they became less cognizant of the individual rights of their people. This is now the glaring consequence of having civil laws patterned after the natural law. A lot of people will be deprived of their freedom of expression because other people see it as contrary to nature. Since natural law is construed differently; therefore, the standard of what is right or wrong has become subjective.

According to the CIA World Factbook, 79% of Brunei's population is Muslim. Islamic belief permits polygamy as long as the husband could suffice the needs of his other families. While other religions duly respect this practice, however, it should be pointed out that polygamy is categorical toleration of adultery. Meanwhile, in Christianity, having an extra-marital affair is an adulterous act. It is a sin per se.

It is clear that both Islam and Christianity have high regard for Divine laws, but they differ in interpreting what is right from wrong. On the other hand, some take tattoos as a sin because of the belief that one’s body is a temple of God, while there are tribes who take tattoos as an expression of their unique culture. Natural law cannot be always the source of civil law.

Therefore, we should not always limit and pattern our civil laws on the natural law because the nature of human beings – aside from being diverse – also changes from time to time. Hence, laws should be made for the sole purpose of giving security in the State and its inhabitants.