Question from a reader:
Does the law need to be logical? Is it designed to avoid logical inconsistencies?

Does the law need to be logical?

Laws, that is, the rules and norms of our society, indeed need to be logical. There are several reasons for this belief, but let’s start by understanding that laws form the foundation of society. The existence of
laws ensures that everyone can live in peace. If laws are chaotic, society will descend into disorder. From this perspective, it is natural to think that laws should have reasoning and be logically consistent.

The Logic of Law and Its Importance

The reason laws require logic is that they regulate people’s behavior and maintain social order. For example, the fundamental idea of contract law is that promises must be kept. This promise is based on trust. If laws were applied in a way that disregarded contracts, businesses would fail, and relationships among friends would gradually deteriorate. When I was working part-time at a judicial scrivener’s office, there was a client who complained that they were not satisfied with the contents of a contract. This was because the contract had been unilaterally disadvantageous. At that moment, I realized how important the logic of law is. Laws are not merely for the sake of following rules; they can be seen as a “theoretical shield” that protects our lives.

Logical Consistency of Law

When considering the consistency of laws, it is also necessary to understand that laws are not always perfect. The background of a particular law often reflects the historical and social context in which it was created. These elements intertwine, and sometimes laws may have logically inconsistent parts. For instance, if a specific law was created in response to past social issues, it may not fit the current social situation. To give a concrete example, if a law regarding land ownership in a certain region was based on historical contexts, it could lead to unfair results in modern society. In such cases, laws may be criticized for lacking logic. In these situations, the consistency of the law needs to be reevaluated in light of changes in time and society.

The Gap Between Legal Theory and Practice

What is interesting here is the gap between legal theory and practice. When studying law, everything seems orderly in theory. However, in actual trials and legal practice, various factors come into play, making it often impossible to resolve issues based solely on logic. For example, in a certain trial, the side that should win according to legal reasoning may actually lose. This can involve elements beyond theoretical understanding, such as the judge’s values, the way evidence is presented, and even mitigating circumstances. In fact, at the office where I work part-time, there are many cases where simply applying the legal text is not sufficient. For instance, even in similar cases, if we do not consider the client’s background and circumstances, we may not be able to provide appropriate advice. Thus, there is a reality where law cannot stand on “logic” alone.

When the Logic of Law Does Not Hold

Now, let’s touch on laws or applications that lack logic. Within Japanese law, there are provisions that are outdated or difficult to apply in practice. For example, there are laws that lose their effectiveness after a certain number of years or laws that are only valid under specific conditions. While these laws may be logical in theory, they can cause confusion in practice. One particularly interesting case I observed was a revision of copyright law. The extension of the copyright protection period meant that past works became subject to new rights. As a result, works that were thought to have entered the public domain were once again managed, leading to confusion among creators and the general public. While the logic of the law holds, in practice, many people ended up feeling dissatisfied.

Conclusion: Laws Need to Be Logical, but…

In conclusion, laws need to be logical. However, there is also the reality that this logic does not always apply in practice. Laws serve as a “theoretical shield” to protect society, and having logical consistency is fundamental, but they must also adapt flexibly to changes in time and social circumstances. As legal professionals, I strongly feel that it is important to listen not only to logic but also to the voices of reality. Understanding the gap between the logic of law and reality is an important point in studying law. Moving forward, I hope to fulfill my role as a member of society while balancing logic and practice.