Abstract

Despite decades of contentions between moral legalists and legal positivists about the place of morality in law, moral law has vehemently stood out as the end of history. The scientific experiment has despondently failed to logically evict the moral law from the jurisprudential discourse. This research article posits that moral law is the End of History as far jurisprudential evolution is concerned. It argues that the mechanization of law through the positivistic experiment is a moral debacle dented with logical inconsistencies and insurmountable fallacies. It thus uses the inseparability thesis to demonstrate the pivotality of moral law in every positive jurisprudence superstructure. It contends that law appeals to our moral sensibilities because it pre-supposes a conscience in the law giver, the law enforcer and the citizen who is supposed to abide by the law. This ought necessity therefore makes the trio morally credible to legislate, enforce the law and be legally bound by the principles and precincts established by the law.