notes on a method for legal reasoning applied to essay writing

1

DRAFT

Notes on a methodology for essay writing in legal science.

Nitish Monebhurrun

(...)la diversit de nos opinions ne vient pas de ce que les uns sont plus importants que les

autres, mais seulement de ce que nous conduisons nos penses par diverses voies (...)1. .

This can be translated by: the diversity of opinions does not mean that some are more

reasonable than others but only means that we conduct our thoughts through different means.2

Quoting Descartes is convenient to set, without any form of tautology, the methodology to

present this paper on legal methodology. Indeed, the method proposed to conduct legal reasoning in

this article has no universal value. Law, as a science, rests on its own methodology which varies

from one legal culture to another. The legal methodology explained hereinafter is influenced by the

French one but will not be limited to the latter which will only act as a useful raw material. It is not

superior to existing methods but cumulative to them.

A method is not, in itself, the material reasoning but the means and techniques used to lead

such reasoning3. It can be induced or deduced from almost all scientific reasoning and it shows

how the mind must be directed as per a given norm4. A legal methodology conceptualises and

rationalises the working means of the jurist5, whether he or she is a professional or a student. This

paper focuses on the methodology for essay writing in legal science.

The latter is a common exercise in legal studies and is often proposed for undergraduate and

postgraduate examinations. Through an essay, it is possible to understand if the student has

understood the basic principles of a given law field and if he or she is in a position to use and apply

1 DESCARTES (R.), Discours de la mthode, Paris, Editions Classiques (dir. E. Lefranc), 1866, p.1-2.

2 This is the author's personal translation.

3 SPINOZA, Trait de la rforme de l'entendement. Tractatus de intellectus emendatione, Paris, Flammarion, 2003,

p.87; BERGEL (J-L.), Mthodologie juridique, Paris, PUF, 2001, p.17.

4 RAMOND (C.), Dictionnaire Spinoza, Paris, Ellipses, 2007, p.120.

5 MULLER (F.), Discours de la mthode juridique, Paris, PUF, 1996, p.37.

2

such principles in order to deal with a particular subject in a rational way. Very often, when

working on an essay, students tend to have the bad habit of exposing their culture and knowledge

instead of answering the question which has been set to them. They want to publicly expose what

they know and what they have learnt. It may be that the aim behind this behaviour is to impress or

to appear as a good and model student. In so doing, they tend to forget that their examiners are

normally more learned than they are and that their aim is not to judge if a student is an itinerant

legal dictionary but to examine his capacity to think like a jurist. What is actually expected from

students is that they make an optimal use of their knowledge by processing it through a reflection so

as to ground a legal reasoning. It is of absolutely no use to rest on mountains of knowledge if the

latter cannot be managed, dominated and canalized when required6. What is important is not what

we know but how we use what we know to maintain a convincing argument. Presented in a martial

metaphor, knowledge is a weapon. In itself, it does not mean victory. Winning will not depend on

the weapon but on how it is used. In the same vein, an essay is not a mere reproduction of a course

which has been learnt by heart or of pieces of articles and books' extracts which have been cut and

pasted; it is an original work having its own dynamic energy7. The student must bring an original

framework filled with solidly built personal thoughts. The material used to conduct a given

argument is potentially accessible to everyone8, but the techniques, forms and methods used for

such purposes require considerable rigor9.

For these reasons, it is sine qua non to have a convenient methodology when confronted to a

legal essay. A method is fundamental to seize the reality of the object studied10

. Methodology is

related to form and form is content brought to surface; it is the consecration of thinking skills

applied to material information11

. Consequently, the aim of this paper is to act as a useful

methodological guide enabling students to tackle essay writing in a pragmatic, efficient and

convincing manner. A good method enables the simplification of complicated matter and the

clarification of confusing situations12

. The master of methodology, Ren Descartes, used to say that

he had no genius but only a method. It is on the flow of this spirit that this paper shall navigate.

For easier comprehension, the method for tackling a legal essay will be presented in a series

6 GOUBEAUX (G.), BIHR (P.), Les preuves crites en droit civil. Mthodologie, Paris, LGDJ, 2005, pp.28-29.

7 BONNET (D.), L'essentiel de la mthodologie juridique, Paris, Ellipses, 2006, p.34. 8 SCHOPENHAUEUR, Arthur, A arte de escrever, Porto Alegre, L&PM, 2012, p.64.

9 Ibid.

10 DESCARTES (R.), Rgles pour la direction de lesprit, Paris, Classiques Garnier, 1997, p.88. 11

SCHOPENHAUEUR, Arthur, A arte de escrever, Porto Alegre, L&PM, 2012, p.63.

12 GRUA (F.), Mthode des tudes de droit. Conseils sur la dissertation et le commentaire, Paris, Dalloz, 2006, p.48.

3

of steps to follow. Each step is found in a particular phase. There is a preparatory process (I) and a

writing process (II).

I. The preparatory process

Step 1: Method for researching relevant data.

Step 2: Method for formulating a problematical question.

Step 3: Method for constructing a plan.

II. The writing process

Step 4: Method for writing an introduction.

Step 5: Method for writing the essay's body.

Step 6: Method for presenting the conclusion.

I. THE PREPARATORY PROCESS

The preparatory process is all the work done before starting to write. It is a fundamental

part of essay writing as the success of the latter is determined by the pertinence of the former.

Three steps can be identified in this process and they relate to data research (step 1) which is of

paramount importance to formulate a problematical question (step 2) and to construct a solid plan

(step 3).

Step 1: Method for researching relevant data.

When looking for pertinent data, it is relevant to define the key words of the subject (1) as

these help to determine the key questions raised by the subject (2) and eventually guide the research

for the applicable law[s] (3).

4

1. Key words must be defined.

Despite its obviousness, it is not unnecessary to remind that the subject given for the essay

must first and foremost be understood. Highlighting and defining the key words constitute an

efficient way to proceed. Words have a meaning which must be given due consideration so as to

avoid going out of the subject13

. The key words can be polysemous and it is fundamental to search

the most convenient definition as per the context of the subject14

. Definitions can exist in given

laws, treaties or precedents. If not a dictionary must be used.

2. Key questions raised by the subject must be determined.

Students must then ask themselves what are the problematical issues and questions raised by

the subject and how legal science can be used to shed light on them. They must understand that the

essay has been set on the basis of some legal questions and that these must be discovered. They

must bear in mind that there are normally no defined and pre-established answers in legal science as

there is not a unique way to construe a question and to construct an essay. The answer brought

forward is not, as such, the most important point; what is fundamental is the legal demonstration

leading to this specific answer. The expectations of the examiner or, more generally of any jurist,

are mostly related to the reasoning adopted by the students to conduct the demonstration and

arguments throughout the essay15

. A high level of freedom therefore exists. However, this does not

imply that the absurdity of an argumentation will be validated. Content and form must be rigorous.

3. Relevant data must be searched by following the hierarchy of norms.

In the path of rigor, a careful selection of data is useful. Such information mainly lies in the

sources of law. A legal question waits for a legal answer which is obtained by using the sources of

law. Answering like a jurist means applying and interpreting existing laws, legal principles,

existing customs and precedents. When looking for relevant data to prepare an essay16

, it is the

applicable law which must first be searched. Writings of distinguished authors act as a secondary

13 BONNET (D.), L'essentiel de la mthodologie juridique, op.cit., p.34.

14 Ibid.

15 PASCAL (B.), De l'esprit gomtrique. Ecrits sur la grce et autres textes, Paris, Flammarion, 1985, p.87:

According to Blaise Pascal, whatever is the object of our persuasion, it is important to know beforehand the one who

we want to persuade. It is essential to know his mind and principles and the relation he maintains with these.

16 This actually applies to any legal work.

5

source of law and therefore as a secondary means of research. Thoughts of authors remain

subjective and do not always reflect positive law. They of course have a persuasive value and they

should definitely be considered but only after the main sources of law have been examined17

. Out

of the primary and secondary sources of law, those which are most relevant to the subject must be

retained. They constitute the usable raw material which must be matched to the given subject so as

to derive a general problematical question which will guide the construction of the essay. This

question normally gives the direction which will be followed in the reasoning. It is the connecting

thread which guides the argumentation. Considering its importance, its formulation must be

explained.

Step 2: Method for formulating a problematical question.

For formulating a problematical question, its definition must be known (1) and this can be

further illustrated by an example (2).

1. The definition of a problematical question.

The problematical question is the angle through which the subject will be studied. It is the

question(s) which the students extract from the subject and on which they decide to work. This

implies that a given subject for a given essay can have various problematical issues. It is hence not

surprising if five students come up with five different questions for the same essay. No one would

be wrong as long as he manages to justify why he has chosen this particular question and why he

thinks that it sheds relevant light on the subject. The question must put emphasis on the interest and

on the difficulties of the essay18

. It can for example, highlight that despite the contradictions which

the subject seems to contain there in fine exists a coherence19

or vice versa. The correct and clear

formulation of the problematical question reveals that the student has well understood the subject20

.

It enables the reader to seize the guiding Ariadne's thread. The problematical question stands on a

17 In international law, the teachings of distinguished authors act as a subsidiary source of international law (See article

38 of the International Court of Justice's statute, available on: http://www.icj-

cij.org/documents/index.php?p1=4&p2=2&p3=0#CHAPTER_II).

18 BONNARD (J.), Mthode de travail de l'tudiant en droit, Paris, Hachette suprieur, 2006, pp.72-73.


20 Ibid., p.36.

6

specific spot in the essay; it is presented in a precise part of the work. This will be considered in

further detail during the explanation on the introduction of the essay21

. For the moment, the

explanation can be illustrated by an example.

2. An example of a problematical question.

In abstract reasoning, the problematical question cannot be formulated ex nihilo. It cannot

be identified before some preliminary tasks. It is indeed the result of all the research which has

been made on the given subject. It might sometimes be apparent, especially when the subject is set

in an interrogative mode. For instance, 'Should laws always be respected? If this is the subject, it

actually contains the problematical issue. Most students might, for example, formulate the latter in

the following manner: 'This essay studies and analyses the mechanism and reasons of compliance

with laws. What will be studied here is how and why laws are respected. This would be the

simplest way of addressing the subject which might be descriptive and perhaps not too well rated.

However, this is not the only way to understand and deal with the subject. It all depends on how

one wants to direct the argumentation. Writing a legal essay does not mean considering all of the

subject's aspects. A sole aspect can be chosen and followed as long as it is duly justified. The

lenses through which the question will be analysed actually delimitates it automatically22

. For the

same subject, another problematical question, and therefore anotherdelimitation, can thus be: 'If by

their material existence and constitution laws are expected to be complied with, certain exceptional

circumstances sometimes legitimate their violation. This would be a more sophisticated but surely

a more interesting manner of setting the question. A form of dialectic comes up with such a

formulation. Very often, law seems to construct its path on contradicting needs23

. Dialectical

problematical questions are much appreciated.

After having decided what question will be examined, the next step is concentrating on how

to proceed to conduct the argumentation. The method proposed for this is to build a working plan

which will, by its own existence, show how the subject and problematical question are dealt with.

21 See Infra.

22 The delimitation of the work will be seen in the part on the introduction.

23 GRUA (F.), Mthode des tudes de droit. Conseils sur la dissertation et le commentaire, op.cit., p.51.

7

Step 3: Method for constructing a plan.

A plan has a defined use (1) and a precise construction (2).

1. The use of a plan

This part raises the question of the necessity of a plan. After all, it very much possible to

start writing the essay right away once all the data has been searched. The use of a plan is to act as

a guide. It acts as an indicator to the reader who must know beforehand where he is being

conducted to24

. It helps to reveal the different aspects of the subject25

. An image can be used to

illustrate this. It is the image of a castle which one has to visit. When confronted to its immensity,

it is not easy to proceed alone in the visit in an orderly and comprehensive manner by fully

understanding the use of such room, such tower, such types of stairs or such dungeon or the reason

behind a given painting, a given wall colour or a given bed size. In such circumstances, it is easy to

get lost despite being in the castle and despite being able to circulate in it. The castle symbolises

the data collected to write the essay. If it is thrown as it is in a disorderly manner in the eyes of the

examiner, the latter will definitely have some difficulties to grasp and understand everything. The

information may be relevant and pertinent but if it is not presented in a properly and rational way,

the exercise is completely futile. It is of absolutely no use to have the required information and

material if they are not correctly applied to a given problem26

. To get back to the image, the castle

becomes immediately more comprehensible and interesting if a guide is present to conduct the visit

and explanation. The immensity of the castle becomes accessible. An essay should in the same

manner have a guide and the latter is materialised in the form of an appropriate methodological

plan. The plan orders the student's arguments to achieve his demonstration. It must be constructed

with rigor and coherence to inform the reader as simply as possible.

2. The construction of the plan.

The plan adopted constitutes the backbone of the work27

. It highlights the essay's structure.

Reading the plan must enable the examiner to know what will be said in each of its part. Its

24 GOUBEAUX (G.), BIHR (P.), Les preuves crites en droit civil. Mthodologie, op.cit., p.30

25 Ibid., p.39.

26 Take the example of a lawyer who knows the applicable law but who is unable to apply it in a convincing way.


8

formulation must hence be quite concise and rigorous. The plan must be clear and intelligible.

When thinking on an essay, a torrent of ideas may come to one's mind. Suppose that there is a line

of twelve ideas relevant and available to tackle the essay. The easiest way of building a plan would

be to divide it in twelve parts28

. Each idea would be exposed in one different part. This way of

proceeding might however have an inconvenience. The work might appear too fragmented and

without a defined coherence. The twelve points might follow each other without the existence of a

necessary link between them. The reader might as well find it difficult to follow and he might

forget the first part when he is reading the last one. He might not find it obvious to photograph

everything in a glance and can easily get disconnected. For more convenience on this point, those

twelve ideas may be reduced to few main ones29

. To achieve this, links must be found between

these ideas. Linking is an art. An artist creates a link by his art because art is beauty forged by

him30

. For the jurist, the art of linking his ideas and arguments is found in his capacity to

synthesise. To synthesise means to build bridges between different ideas in order to harmonise

them. The ideas must not be presented independently and seperately throughout the essay but must

be ordered in a synthetical fashion. Hence to construct a plan with twelve points means to

synthesise and to harmonise these points upon two or three main axes which will describe the core

ideas developed throughout the essay31

. In turn, the main axes can contain two or three sub-parts.

Applied to the plan, this means that there can be two or three titles and two or three subtitles per

title. The subtitles will illustrate the main titles. These different parts must be related to each other

in such a continuous and uninterrupted way32

that the core of the essay is understood by simply

reading the plan.

Considering the subject set above, 'Should laws be respected?', and the problematical

question proposed33

, the following indicative plan can be adopted:

I. The expectations of compliance with laws in principle.

A. A logical compliance as laws derive from the People's will.

B. A necessary compliance as laws maintain social order.

28 This would be in conformity with Descartes' method of dividing each problem or difficulty in as many parts as

possible in order to solve them. See, DESCARTES (R.), Discours de la mthode, Paris, Editions Classiques (dir. E.

Lefranc), 1866, p.14; DESCARTES (R.), Rgles pour la direction de lesprit, op.cit, p.154. 29 Note that if this apply for essay writing, it might be different while writing a thesis.

30 GIORDANO (B.), Des liens, Paris, Allia, 2001, p.10.

31 GOUBEAUX (G.), BIHR (P.), Les preuves crites en droit civil. Mthodologie, op.cit., p.41.

32 DESCARTES (R.), Rgles pour la direction de lesprit, op.cit., p.127. 33 The second problematical question will be chosen : 'If by their material existence and constitution laws are expected

to be complied with, certain exceptional circumstances sometimes justify civil disobedience.'

9

II. The acceptation of civil disobedience as an exception.

A. A civil disobedience justified by the egregious character of laws.

B. A civil disobedience upholding morality at the detriment of legality.

This would be a basic type of plan putting forward firstly the principle before presenting the

exception. The plan answers to the subject. It states that laws should in principle be respected but

civil disobedience is tolerated. In the same reasoning, the subtitles must answer to the main title.

Hence, there is, in principle, a compliance with laws (Title 1) because firstly laws derive from the

People's will (Subtitle A) and secondly, because laws maintain social order which is in itself in

perfect conformity with the People's will (Subtitle B). Similarly, civil disobedience can be justified

(Title II) by the existence of egregious laws (Subtitle A) and implies a choice of morality rather than

legality (Subtitle B). The construction is rather mathematical in the sense that A+B must equal to I

(or II). A simple illustration would be as such:

I. 30

A. 16

[+]

B. 14

II. 30

A. 17

[+]

B. 1334

Presented in such a way, the final work is sure to be coherent and convincing. What is said

in subtitle A will not appear in subtitle B. Each part's content must be in line with its title35

. This

avoids useless repetition and prevents from going out of subject. It is also important to establish a

balance between the different parts in order to avoid having a well-furnished first part or first

subtitle and a poor second part or second subtitle36

. By reading the plan, the essay's direction is

known. Considering that a global coherence is expected, it is recommended not to present the main

34 A+B must = I, hence 16+14=30.


36 Ibid., pp.39-40; for instance, the first part must not spread on five pages while the second one rests on two pages.

10

titles as being in full contradiction. The second part must not be an antithesis of a thesis explained

in the first one. They must complete each other, the aim being to value one global thesis. In fine,

each part is firmly related to each other and their harmonious combination states ab initio what will

be said. Examples of combinations for I and II can be37

: I. The principle / II. The exception; I. The

applicability (of a principle) / II. The efficiency; I. The application (of a principle) / II. The

consequences; I. The effectivity (of a principle) / II. The efficiency; I. The conditions (for the

validity of a contract) / II. The execution (of the contract's clauses); I. The enforcement (of a new

statute) / II. The contribution (of the new statute); I. The structure (of an international organisation) /

II. The Operations (of the international organisation); I. The Use (of a court) / II. The competences

(of the court)38

.

These propositions are not the most original ones but they have the advantage of being clear.

The originality of the plan and of the titles relates to each and everyone's creativity.

Establishing the plan has another implication. For optimal efficiency, the choice of words

for the titles must be rigorous. As the titles must be concise, the right words must be chosen; titles

must be eloquent39

. They must reflect and enlighten the content and a maximum of things must be

said in a minimum of words. If possible, they must be affirmative and written in an affirmative

mode40

.

What can be noted is that the whole preparation obeys to a deconstruction theory. The

subject is dissected, each part is analysed and the composition of the essay follows a certain

syllogism. To use a theatrical allegory, the preparation of an essay is constituted of all the behind-

the-scene assembling and fitting work. Writing the essay means raising the curtain and presenting a

fully prepared and duly accomplished work. In other words, essay writing is not tantamount to

improvisation. The student must not start writing right way and search his way through as he

proceeds. He must not decide what he will say during the writing process but before it has started:

discovery writing is not for the jurist. Everything must be known and concluded beforehand. This

makes writing easier, clearer and quicker. As he already knows what he will state in part A and in

part B, writing becomes a formality combined with each and everyone's personal style.

37 The plan will of course depend on the given subject.

38 BONNARD (J.), Mthode de travail de l'tudiant en droit, op.cit., pp.80-89.

39 PASCAL (B.), Penses, Paris, Flammarion, 1976, p.53: Eloquence, according to the author, is the art of saying

things in such a way that those who are listening (or reading) can do so without any pain and with pleasure and that

they become so interested that they voluntarily dive into reflection.

40 The student is affirming a point.

11

Once the problematical question has been found and once the plan has been determined and

constructed, the essay can be written.

12

II. THE WRITING PROCESS

All the material gathered and ordered in the previous part can now be used. In the writing

phase, the data collected and processed will be placed in specific and well-defined parts of the

essay. This will be seen herein. Some preliminary considerations must be put forward. The style

must be fluid. This avoids the reader from being disconnected and from getting lost. The latter

must be guided41

and accompanied from the first to the last word. Besides it is necessary to go

directly to the point while writing. A legal essay is not a fictitious story and no kind suspense must

be used or maintained42

. Writing obviously depends on the student's pen and ease. However, it

must be noted that a good method can compensate and cover any gap in the writing style.

Despite the specificities of the method explained in the first part, the form of the essay

remains classical. It is composed of an introduction (step 4), a body (step 5) and can have a

conclusion (step 6).

Step 4: Method for writing an introduction.

The introduction states what will be seen in the essay and why and how it will be seen43

. It

can start with a quote (1) which must be justified (2) before the keys words are defined (3) and the

historical background of the subject is set (4). This chain enables to delimitate the subject (5) in

order to formulate and explain the problematical question (6) before presenting the adopted plan

(7).

1. The introduction can start with a quote.

An original way to start is to quote a distinguished author, a famous precedent or even part

of the text of a statute or of a treaty. The aim is to catch the reader's attention from the very first

words. The quote must therefore be original and in line with the subject and eventually with the

41 See the castle's allegory supra.

42 When a lawyer pleads, he is affirmative and states his arguments clearly and directly. He does not play on suspense.

The same reasoning method applies here.


13

point of view that is valued in the work44

. As from now on and concerning the whole essay, it is

important to link the different paragraphs to ensure coherence. The reasoning must flow.

Consequently, once the quote has been found and written, it must be justified.

2. The choice of the quote and the quote must be explained.

The choice must be explained and the relevance to the subject must be deepened. The

presence of the quote is necessarily grounded on a reason and this reason must be specified. Once

this is done, the key words of the subject must be defined.

3. The key words must be defined.

This has actually already been done in the preparatory phase and must now only be used

properly. Indeed, definition enables a first delimitation of the subject. The influence of such and

such definition on the delimitation must be explained45

. It is logical to define the object of a study

before starting the study46

. A good method implies knowing what is being worked on before

starting the work47

. Building cannot start if the base is not known and solid48

. Of course not every

word must be defined but only the key ones49

. Obscure or unequivocal definitions must not be

relied upon; definitions which are used must be well-kown and well explained50

ones. As already

mentioned above, definitions must be searched by following the hierarchy of norms. Existing

definitions in positive law have a primacy.

44 If the above mentioned essay subject ('Should laws be respected?') is considered a possible quote could be:

It is not desirable to cultivate a respect for the law, so much as for the right. The only obligation which I have a

right to assume, is to do at any time what I think is right. (See: THOREAU (H.D.), Civil Disobedience and Other

Essays, New York, Dover Publications, 1993, p.2);

Another quote from the same author could be: Law never made men a whit more just; and, by means of their

respect for it, even the well-disposed are daily made the agents of injustice. (Ibid.)


46 POPPER (K.R.), Des sources de la connaissance et de l'ignorance, Paris, Petite Bibliothque, 1998, pp.106-107:

For some philosophers like Aristotle, definition is in itself a principle and lies at the very basis of any science.

47 PASCAL (B.), De l'esprit gomtrique. Ecrits sur la grce et autres textes, op.cit., pp.68-69.

48 Ibid., p.89.


50 Ibid., p.91.

14

4. The historical background can be set.

After this step, the historical background of the subject can be raised if need be or if by its

very consistence, the subject makes it inevitable. As per the subject, it can for example be the

drafting history of a law, the history underscoring a particular concept or the history of a given

institution or court51

. Depending on the essay, the historical aspects may appear before or after the

definition. However, if diving in history might not always be required, defining the subject is a

must for reasons of proper delimitation.

5. The delimitation of the subject.

The construction is now ripe for the work to be delimitated. Delimitating means further

highlighting the interest of the subject by stating what will be taken into consideration in the study

and what will be excluded. The angle of analysis must be specified and justified52

. The

delimitation is the result of what has been said in the precedent steps. A particular quote, a

particular definition and particular historical aspects give rise to a particular delimitation53

. It is not

at all strange if two students delimitate the same subject differently. Philosophical, political,

economical or sociological considerations can also be taken into account even if their presence must

be controlled. The essay remains a legal one. These different steps which have been cautiously

followed must lead to the problematical question which will be tackled in the body of the essay.

This question, which has also already been determined in the preparatory step, must not be brought

about abruptly and delimitating the subject allows a more convenient presentation. The linking

logic still applies and the harmony which exists between the different parts of the introduction must

direct the presentation of the problematical issue. The reasons for delimitating the subject already

give a foretaste of this question. The latter must appear as a logical consequence of what has been

said from first word of the introduction.

51 For the subject considered in this paper, the historical background of civil disobedience can, for example, be

described.


53 For instance quoting Thoreau makes it clear that the issue of civil disobedience will be studied. Civil disobedience

enters the framework of the analysis and helps to delimitate the subject.

15

6. Presenting the problematical question.

The problematical question which has long before been forged and framed is presented at

this point of the introduction. It is the crystallisation of the reasoning. The formulation of this

question has already been explained in step two54

.

A last step remains before completing the introduction. The problematical question has

been stated but must be enlightened. It is important to specify the means that will be used to

provide such light and to bring potential answers. These means have also already been carved and

sharpened in the preparatory phase and indeed rest in the adopted plan55

.

7. Announcing the plan.

Finally, the plan chosen for the essay must be announced. The reader must know that for a

given problematical question a given solution exists. The plan cannot appear to him without having

been presented. The introduction therefore ends by a specification of the main axes of the essay.

Stating the two or three main parts is wholly sufficient.

Considering the question already raised: 'If by their material existence and constitution laws

are expected to be complied with, certain exceptional circumstances sometimes legitimate their

violation', the plan can be announced as follows: 'Therefore, despite the legitimate expectations of a

compliance with laws in principle (I), civil disobedience can be accepted as an exception (II).'.

The plan may be followed as from this point and the body and conclusion of the essay may

be written.

Step 5: Method for writing the essay's body.

Here emphasis will be laid on the writing technique. It again rests on the chain spirit of

links. Its mathematical aspect has already been explained. The parts of the plan must be related to

each other and this can be achieved by using transitions. When proceeding after having written the

54 See supra.

55 See step 3 supra.

16

first title, it is important to explain why it contains two or three subtitles, that is, why the 'I' is

divided into 'A' and 'B'. A linking sentence must be used for such purposes. For example:

I. The expectations of compliance with laws as a principle.

Compliance with laws is logical from the perspective of legal theory because laws derive

from the People's own will (A) and such laws aim at maintaining social order which is again in

conformity with the People's will (B). .

Hereon, subtitle 'A' can start. This part will explain why compliance with laws is logical as

a matter of principle if the People's will is considered. Nothing else should be covered in this part

as the latter has its own aim and its own rationale. Writing should concentrate only on the subtitle's

object with the objective of convincing the reader. Again, the different paragraphs of the subtitle

must be arranged in an orderly manner. Arguments and ideas must be illustrated and justified56

and

not just copied and pasted57

. The line of the demonstration must be kept in mind while writing. In

other words, the general direction of the essay must not be forgotten. Each word and each sentence

have a meaning and are individually useful for a collective construction; each word and each

sentence must be interrogated to check if their presence is justified. All this helps to avoid going

out of subject.

At the end of part 'A', there must be a connecting sentence explaining why the ideas

developed in 'A' obviously lead to 'B'. It can be presented as simply as this:

As per the legal theory, laws are complied with because they are the result of the People's

will. Considering that such laws directly or indirectly aim at preserving a social order which is

also wanted by the People, they are obviously respected as a matter of principle.

After this statement, subtitle B can be presented:

B. A necessary compliance as laws maintain social order.

At the end of part 'B', there must be a connecting sentence making it clear why what has

56 It can be useful to present several arguments in different paragraphs. It might lighten the essay.

57 BONNET (D.), L'essentiel de la mthodologie juridique, op.cit., p.49; PASCAL (B.), De l'esprit gomtrique.

Ecrits sur la grce et autres textes, op.cit., p.91.

17

been seen in Part I logically leads and connects to Part II. For instance:

In legal matters, principles are never solitary navigators. They are often followed by

exceptions. As a matter of fact, if compliance with laws is accepted as a principle, exceptions exist.

Civil disobedience is one of these.

Title II can then be written:

II. The acceptation of civil disobedience as an exception. .

The same reasoning applies for all titles and subtitles of the essay. Once the body has been

built, a conclusion can be drawn.

Step 6: Method for presenting the conclusion.

Many think that a conclusion is not necessary for an essay. Indeed, if the student has been

clear enough throughout his demonstration, there should be nothing more to add. Very often,

students tend to include in the conclusion some ideas which they have forgotten or omitted in

precedent parts or which have in some way popped at the end of the essay. This definitely breaks

the global coherence of the work and does not serve the purpose of a conclusion which is neither a

collection of ideas found in extremis nor a summary what has already been said. Repetition might

appear as a doubt on one's own clarity. As this is the part which the examiner reads as he gets to

the end of the essay, it is important to make him leave the last lines on a good impression.

Particular attention is therefore required. A conclusion must connect the current issue to parallel

ones so as to further express the interest and the use of the subject and the difficulties it implies58

.

What has been explained in the essay can for example be compared to some current events or

debates59

on a similar matter. Eventually, what is stated as a conclusion can be geared to match and,

if possible, to answer the questions which had been raised in the introduction60

. This completes the

reasoning cyle.


59 On comparative law for instance.

60 Ibid.

notes on a method for legal reasoning applied to essay writing

Documents