Please rate this essay and any feedback is greatly appreciated. Thanks!



The balance of determinacy and flexibility has always been a great debate of the legal communities. Should the law be determinate, or should it be flexible enough to account for various circumstances, times, and places? Some scholars believe that law should be radically fair. It must establish a universal standard no matter the circumstances, times, or places; otherwise, it disobeys the principle of fairness. Others believe that if the law never changes, it cannot adapt to the complexity of the real world.

It is widely acknowledged that the initial purpose of establishing the law is to set objective and standardized principles. Hence, some legal scholars believe that determinacy is one of the core values of the law. First, articles of laws are definitive. They clearly define the rights and obligations of citizens and their corresponding legal consequences. Moreover, case facts are definitive and objective existences. Therefore, the process of case handling is to properly apply definitive laws to definitive case facts, which always lead to definitive rules. The determinacy of the law further leads to the stability and predictability of the legal institutions.

However, applying laws to cases is not as easy as looking for seats in a movie theater with a ticket. Generally speaking, there is not always “the correct answer” in rulings. Although determinant laws can add to the stability and predictability of legal institutions, there have always been some degrees of indeterminacy in legal institutions themselves. Since the laws are the high-level abstract summary of human behaviors, applying this summary to specific individual cases can trigger various problems. For instance, when there are gaps in the laws to be filled, it can be difficult to find exact correspondence of certain cases in the laws. As time goes and society develops, some laws may also become outdated. Thus, unchangeable laws can hinder the development of legal institutions.

The written laws cannot predict all social phenomenon, nor can they adapt to changes in times and places. Hence, the amendment and practice of law should be flexible enough to consider various circumstances, times, and places. For example, before the 18th century, laws in most countries did not grant women the right to vote. Because of the development of the laws, women today have the right to vote, but some countries also have women as their presidents. Moreover, the enactment of laws should also consider the differences in traditions, cultures, and religions of different countries and regions. Alcoholic drinks, for example, are legitimate in most places in the world, but in Islamic countries such as Bangladesh, they are banned by the laws. Finally, flexibility in laws should be allowed to adapt to different social conditions. When crises such as wars or pandemics occur, granting the government more temporary powers enables the government to centralize more resources to solve the problem.

To conclude, although determinacy is undeniably an essential characteristic of the law, various uncertainties exist in enacting and practicing laws. If one simple-mindedly pursues the determinacy of the laws for fairness but overlooks the flexibility of the laws, then it can cause the legal institutions to become rigid and outdated, which in turn hinders the development of the laws and the societies.