Six core values in natural law as a common concern for human development

Abstract This paper attempts to identify the core values in natural law as a shared value system, based on natural law theories and issues confronting the world today. It identifies the doctrines that influence major natural law thinking and then proposes a minimum content for constitutionalism based on such natural law shared values. The purpose is to identify with clarity over-riding principles of natural justice in solving practical problems. The methodology adopted is doctrinal, conceptual, and analytical. The findings detail common values for humanity and mandate revisions of modern constitutions considering the conclusions reached based on natural law dictums. This article is the first of its kind to link natural law with constitutionalism while explicating the ends of natural law considering experience and observation. It is also proposed in this research that if governments fail to meet the social contract with the people on the core values, then international dispute resolution forums and human rights advocates should play their part in enforcing these common core values.


Introduction
The aim of this paper is to identify core values in natural law that can facilitate human development. By synthesizing natural law philosophies into six core values, this research suggests that some of the current legal issues faced by the world, such as the misuse of power, restrictions on freedom, protection of the law, and poverty prevention, can be addressed. Laws grounded in natural law theories have been misused worldwide, leading to a need to restate the core values in natural law to prevent such misuse.
Natural law theories must be verified by human experience to be practical and convincing. This paper addresses modern problems with natural law theories while juxtaposing them with human experience. Human actions must be grounded on sound principles of natural law to be justifiable. Therefore, this research paper critically evaluates current world issues while proposing solutions in natural law and a clearer restatement of it. Six core natural law values are identified from the ABOUT THE AUTHOR Dr. Usman Quddus is a post-doctoral research fellow at the Faculty of Law, Multimedia University. Dr. Dennis Khong is an associate professor at the Faculty of Law, Multimedia University.

Values in natural law
The discussion of values in natural law has been extensively explored by various philosophers such as Aristotle, John Locke, H. L. A. Hart, Lon L. Fuller, John Rawls, and John Finnis. Thus, it is informative to briefly examine the types of values understood by these natural law thinkers.

Aristotle
Aristotle, an ancient Greek philosopher who lived from 384 BC to 322 BC (Shields, 2022), believed that natural law consists of universally accepted notions of justice, which can be deduced through knowledgeable reasoning (Kroger, 2004). Aristotle's argument had two dimensions. Firstly, he posited that there is a relation between means and end; just as an acorn will always grow into an oak tree (Morrison, 1997, PP. 41-48), the goal of law should be directed towards the goals of mankind (Morrison, 1997). Secondly, Aristotle acknowledged the importance of empiricism, observation, and practical knowledge in creating laws (Morrison, 1997). He advocated for a temperate approach to human behavior (Morrison, 1997) and believed that reasoning based on rationality is the highest form of human evolution, compared to vegetative and sensing states (Kroger, 2004). In Greek philosophy, knowledge is the highest pursuit of virtue. Aristotle's ideas on knowledge and experience continue to be relevant in addressing contemporary human problems. Similarly, Muhammad Iqbal (Iqbal, 1934), a Muslim natural law philosopher, advocated for the pursuit of scientific and rational knowledge as a means of reforming Islam.

Thomas Aquinas
Thomas Aquinas (1225-1274) believed that divine law, or eternal law, was superior to natural law, which was a means to achieve the ends dictated by eternal law (Garcia, 1962). Seeking truth or the search for knowledge of the truth was one of the dictates of eternal and natural law for him (Garcia, 1962). Aquinas divided this search for truth into speculative and practical knowledge, the former aimed at achieving scientific knowledge based on empiricism and molded by eternal law ends (Murphy, 2004). The ultimate goal of all secondary and tertiary laws, according to Aquinas, was eternal law, which he saw as the ultimate good (Murphy, 2004). He believed that spiritual nurturing should coincide with temperate physical fortunes for happiness and emphasized the importance of worldly or scientific knowledge as well. Aquinas argued that a value system, as commanded in the Christian scriptures, was discoverable through human reasoning and reconcilable with rationality. His theory has implications for the reformation of religions seeking a rational basis. Locke (1632Locke ( -1704 viewed human nature as based on cooperative contact, self-preservation, maintenance of peace, and property rights (Byrne, 1964). He also proposed three tiers of propositions in natural law, like Aristotle and Aquinas, asserting the superiority of divine law and suggesting man-made law align with divine law while emphasizing individual rights (Freeman, 2014, pp. 132-134). Locke advocated for a government that upholds individual rights and justified revolution if a government failed to sustain natural rights, which he considered inalienable (Byrne, 1964). Similar to Aquinas, Locke believed that upholding promises was a crucial element of natural law values (Freeman, 2014, PP. 132-134). Therefore, Locke's legal philosophy centers around the protection of natural rights to life, liberty, and property.

H. L. A. Hart
H. L. A. Hart (1907Hart ( -1992 was a twentieth-century jurist who had a positivist inclination. However, his understanding of positive law accepted the overriding influence of natural law, and his book titled The Concept of Law postulates the minimum content of natural law (Hart & Green, 2012, pp. 185-200). Hart, unlike Austin, didn't conceive of law as commands of some sovereign; rather, he thought of law as an accepted obligation (Hart & Green, 2012). His model of rules comprises primary rules and secondary rules that must comply with the rules of morality. Primary rules, according to him, were general obligations, and secondary rules prescribed modes for changing, interpreting, and enforcing those primary rules (Hart & Green, 2012). The interesting point in Hart's concept of law is regarding rules of morality to which all laws must conform. Hart, unlike Aquinas and Locke, excluded divine law and made human survival the basic premise or fundamental norm of all laws (Hart & Green, 2012). Taking forward his discussion on survival, he postulated five norms for a legal system as a premise: (i) human vulnerability means that humans should not be subject to arbitrary attacks, (ii) approximate equality implies forbearance of more powerful towards the weak, (iii) limited altruism to secure forbearance, (iv) limited resources meant to secure and maintain the property, and (v) punishments to deter anti-social conduct (Hart & Green, 2012). It can be concluded that Hart's theory has a secular content with a major premise of human survival supplemented by the five minor premises mentioned above.

Lon L. Fuller
Lon L. Fuller (1902Fuller ( -1978 distinguishes between the internal morality of natural law and external natural law. External natural law concerns substantive law and focuses on fundamental rules that are necessary for meaningful human co-existence (Chand, 1994). On the other hand, Fuller's (1964) internal morality of law consists of (i) generality of law, (ii) proper promulgation, (iii) prospectivity of law, (iv) intelligibility of laws promulgated, (v) non-contradiction, (vi) possibility of obedience, (vii) constancy through time, and (viii) congruence between official action and declared rule.
Fuller's enigma in law can be best explained through a story he told. The story follows the efforts of a King named Rex, whose attempts at making law are unsuccessful in different ways. At first, he makes individual decisions without any rules (non-generality). Then, he creates a legal code to govern his decisions but keeps its contents secret (non-promulgation). He then publishes decrees, but they are entirely retrospective (non-prospectivity). Next, he publishes a code of prospective rules, but the provisions prove to be incomprehensible to his subjects (non-intelligible). A code consisting of clear provisions follows, but it is full of contradictions, each provision being nullified by a different inconsistent provision (contradiction). Rex then produces a code where the provisions are clear but impossible to comply with (non-possibility of obedience). This is followed by a code that is constantly changing from day to day (non-constancy). Finally, Rex produces a clear and intelligible code, but time reveals that his judgments, supposedly applying the code, are impossible to reconcile with its provisions (non-congruence) (Simmonds, 2008). Therefore, Fuller proposes his internal morality of law as a solution to counter King Rex's predicament in the form of the procedural aspects of natural law. John Rawls (1921-2002 continued the tradition of the social contract theory primarily initiated by Hobbes (1651) and Locke (1690). Rawls conceived his notion of the "veil of ignorance" as a principle of justice through the vision of persons who are not yet born and do not know about their social condition, sex, origin, ethnicity, and other natural possessions (Rawls, 1999). Rawls conceptualizes the principles of justice to be of primordial importance, including equality together with basic natural rights of speech, conscience, and association. Furthermore, Rawls's idea of justice includes distributive and economic justice, which recognizes the reality of economic inequalities and the need to fulfill the most basic economic needs of all (Rawls, 1999). Rawls also believed that "truth is the first virtue of thought" (Sharma, 2021). John Finnis (1940-) bases his natural law doctrine on what he calls self-evident truths that cannot be refuted by counterarguments. In his work, Finnis (2011) outlines seven fundamental values that are essential for human societies to flourish: (i) life, (ii) knowledge, (iii) play, (iv) aesthetic experience, (v) sociability (friendship), (vi) practical reasonableness, and (vii) spirituality or religion. These values are grounded in the pursuit of truth, which entails making correct judgments in all matters (Tan, 2000). According to Renton (1981), Finnis's core values are not just abstract theories but rather self-evident truths. This means that Finnis's values cannot be denied or superseded as the common good core values for humanity (Ying, 1990). Natural law theories regard these core values as ultimate goods or rights and interests (Simmonds, 2008).

Research methodology
The research methodologies utilized in this study are doctrinal legal analysis and conceptual research. Doctrinal legal analysis involves examining statutory provisions and analyzing court decisions to determine a coherent interpretation of the law (Hutchinson & Duncan, 2012). In this study, we will use doctrinal legal analysis to analyze blasphemy laws in Pakistan in relation to the "pursuit of knowledge principle" proposed by natural law philosophers. Conceptual research involves applying theories and frameworks to observable phenomena in the real world. The violation of preventive detention laws in suppressing freedom of speech and the ambiguity in the language of the law are discussed in relation to the fundamental liberties posited in natural law theories. The theoretical framework in this study identifies the major themes in natural law to develop better propositions to address practical issues.

Results
The results of this research suggest that modern constitutions should be modified based on natural law dicta. The results also make a restatement of natural law. Six core values of natural law are proposed for incorporation in constitutions and laws: (i) rational knowledge, (ii) protection of human life and its requisites, (iii) restrictions on human freedoms must be precisely stated, (iv) equality in socio-economic justice, (v) respect for individuals' pursuit of spirituality and (vi) democratic values.

Meaning of natural law
Natural law describes law through a moral lens. It holds only those laws to be valid that satisfy the moral purpose of the natural law (Crowe, 2009). Laws that do not conform to natural law are labelled "unjust laws" (Crowe, 2009). The idea of natural law has been examined and developed by many legal philosophers of since ancient time. Generally, the development of natural law idea can be divided into four time periods: (i) the ancient period, (ii) the medieval period, (iii) the Renaissance, and (iv) modern time.

The ancient period
Natural law seems to have originated in the Ancient Greece. Its conceptions can be found in the philosophies of Socrates, Plato, Aristotle, and Cicero etc (Leiboff & Thomas, 2004). Plato employed the term reasoned wisdom for finding the appropriate law (Leiboff & Thomas, 2004). Aristotle also advocated reasoning for deriving law by looking at the consequences of any law and figuring out the perfect law (Leiboff & Thomas, 2004). Cicero seems to be the first to use the term natural law in the sense it is known today (Leiboff & Thomas, 2004). For him, natural law was universal as derived from the properly ordered reason which was derived from the order of things (Leiboff & Thomas, 2004). By this he meant that cosmic order combined with reason led to a virtuous life.

The medieval period
Philosophies on natural law in the medieval period are shaped by the views of St. Augustine (c 354-450) and St. Thomas Aquinas (c 1225-1274). Augustine compared the rule of gang of criminals with a government (Crowe, 2009). In his view, both collect and spend money from the public for their welfare. However, a just government can be distinguished if it has laws serving God's end.
Aquinas made a distinction between four types of laws. To him, "eternal law" is the will of God and encompasses scientific and practical laws governing human conduct. "Divine law", according to Aquinas, is revealed to humans through scriptures. "Natural law", on the other hand, is discoverable through reason. Finally, "human law", according to Aquinas, means the man-made law of a particular community which is discoverable through reason alone (Crowe, 2009). Aquinas argued that there are certain fundamental rules of justice common to all communities (Crowe, 2009).

The renaissance
This time between the fifteenth to seventeenth century lays down the foundation of natural rights in the writings of Thomas Hobbes, John Locke and Jean-Jacques Rousseau. Thomas Hobbes was the earliest contractarian theorist to propose a hypothetical social contract of people with the sovereign to surrender to the sovereign in return for protection and peace (Wacks, 2009). This contractarian approach was utilised by Locke to provide a theory of natural rights comprising of life, liberty and property, that a government must uphold to justify its existence (Wacks, 2009). Hence, Locke is the founder of all inalienable rights also known as fundamental rights in the constitutions of the world. Rosseau gave the idea of a general will being expressed by society as a whole, and laws have to be framed in the interest of public welfare. His theory can be said to provide the foundation for modern-day democracies expressing the general will through parliament (Wacks, 2009).

Modern time
The period of twentieth-century and after may be termed as a revival in natural law theories. Natural law had faced a decline due to the fact that no law in England could be declared invalid for violating natural law principles (Leiboff & Thomas, 2004). However, it gained increasing importance due to its recognition in American constitution as inalienable rights and subsequent affirmation through the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (Wacks, 2009). Philosophers like John Rawls and John Finnis made a restatement of natural law as stated above while affirming the individual rights to life, liberty, religiosity, property, and economic rights. Rawls and Finnis had distinct sets of natural law values as stated supra.

Six core values of natural law
Natural law theorists and activists assert that all laws must conform to natural law (Simmonds, 2008), and this assertion has a profound impact on laws around the world. Fundamental rights and other natural rights are an endowment of natural law theories, such as inalienable rights in the U.S. Constitution and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
Since the earliest times, the theories of natural law have had different interpretations from different jurists, each with their own take on the meaning of natural law. However, these interpretations have developed into a pristine form, with the thoughts of later illustrious jurists of natural law collectively revealing the precedence of six values. Knowledge and life are primary values in the natural law philosophies of Locke, Rawls, and Finnis, while freedom, democracy, and spirituality have an important place in the philosophies of these natural law thinkers. According to Hart's idea of human vulnerability, the amelioration of vulnerability requires these six values in constitutions, which will be explained below when we look at the six values separately and explain their significance.
The natural law theories claim that law is capable of being systematically studied and exposed insofar as it is based on principles of reason and justice. This assumption is based on the supposition that various established rules could be related to the underlying principles they expressed or rights they protected. Blackstone's commentary on the Laws of England presented the major features of English Law as an embodiment and protection of certain basic rights (Simmonds, 2008). The six core values proposed in this paper are deemed universal based on the common concerns in natural law theories.
The theories of jurisprudence attempt to establish a basis for proper human conduct. Ranging from positivism to the sociological school, natural law holds a dominant position in laying down comprehensive rules for the foundation of human behavior. It is the only school of jurisprudence that establishes core values for human affairs which ultimately lead to the formulation of laws and regulations. The values of natural law claim superiority over all other value systems, and their influence is being felt throughout the world. For instance, the Supreme Court of Pakistan in Hakim Khan vs Government of Pakistan, PLD 595 (Supreme Court of Pakistan) held that Sharia injunctions, which are the Grundnorm of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, cannot override fundamental rights and other provisions in the Constitution. This indicates that Islamic countries, which are usually bound by strict methodological requirements, are also influenced by natural law theories. Natural law represents the divine will, consisting of the ultimate shared value of justice mostly attributed to God. Muhammad Iqbal, the ideological founder of Pakistan, was also influenced by natural law ideas and he forcefully advocated for rationality in religious thought (Hillier, 2010).
Herein, we elaborate on the six core values of natural law: (i) rational knowledge, (ii) protection of human life and its requisites, (iii) precise statements of restrictions on human freedoms, (iv) equality in socio-economic justice, (v) respect for individuals' pursuit of spirituality, and (vi) democratic values.

Rational knowledge
The pursuit of knowledge as the highest virtue has its roots in ancient Greek thought and has been shaped by philosophers such as Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle. It is also discussed as a virtue in the earliest known philosophies (Pigliucci, n.d..). The movement for seeking and imparting knowledge with intellectual integrity can be seen as starting in the Greek tradition under the influence of a positivist legal theoretical framework. For example, according to Plato, Socrates chose to be punished with death by drinking hemlock instead of absconding for his commitment to knowledge and wisdom. Aristotle was a strong advocate for the seeking of knowledge, seeing it as the end of the law (Kroger, 2004). His ideal of the pursuit of knowledge in legal theory was later validated by all natural law jurists, as discussed in the Literature Review section above. Knowledge can range from spiritual to all otherworldly affairs, such as science and the arts. Spiritual knowledge has also remained a topic of discussion among mystics and religious scholars, with much religious knowledge directed toward seeking union with a Supreme deity. Human civilization is at its zenith today due to knowledge. However, knowledge without an honest basis or not dictated by truth lacks virtue and is contrary to natural law, as mentioned by Rawls (Sharma, 2021). Hence, intellectual integrity is of utmost importance in the pursuit of knowledge. The implications of knowledge are huge, and there are no limits to its benefits. However, the pursuit of knowledge need not be prejudiced and biased and should have a rational basis, as advocated by Rawls.
The jurists of Islamic law outline the purposes of Islam as religion, progeny, life, wealth, and mental well-being (Khan, 2006), which are regarded as the ultimate truths or higher purposes of law in Islam. Rational sources of Islamic law are checked against these objectives of Islamic law for their validity (Khan, 2006). Unfortunately, some Muslim jurists have advocated for a restricted pursuit of knowledge for achieving the purposes of Islamic law, even though unrestricted knowledge is a sine qua non for the pursuit of higher purposes of Islam. As a result, Islamic countries have seen a lot of regression in relation to laws on free speech, and many intellectuals have faced the ire of not conforming to the mainstream discourse. For example, the famous mystic Al Hallaj was put to death through a court decree for claiming to see the truth of God within himself and professing it, which led to his execution (Mohamad Ramli, 2013).
Constitutions are regarded as the highest law in many countries, and it is widely believed that the fundamental framework of a constitution, rooted in natural law, takes precedence over all other laws, including the constitution itself. Reference can be made to Indira Nehru Gandhi v. Raj Narain [1975] AIR 2299. However, some provisions of constitutions in various countries contain limitations on the pursuit of knowledge. Pakistan's constitution is a prime example of this. The Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, like those of India and Malaysia, guarantees fundamental rights of speech, religion, and education. However, freedom of speech is curtailed by law in the interest of public order, the glory of Islam, friendly relations with other nations, and public decency, among other things (Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan 1973). Similarly, the right to education is viewed in terms of access to education, rather than the unrestricted pursuit of knowledge (Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan 1973). Additionally, legislation can regulate the right to profess religion in the interest of public order (Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan 1973). The Pakistan Penal Code of 1860 imposes penalties for insulting religious figures and defaming individuals, as all laws based on natural law protect the dignity of individuals. The section on defamation in the Pakistan Penal Code stipulates that truthful imputation in good faith may be a defense in defamation proceedings, and that good faith is a question of fact that must be decided independently in each case (Pakistan Penal Code, 1860).
As previously mentioned, knowledge is considered the path to salvation. However, in the realm of academia, there are no legal provisions or exceptions to protect individuals from facing legal repercussions for their pursuit of knowledge. For instance, in Pakistan, the section on blasphemy of the Companions of Prophet Muhammad imposes a penalty of up to three years, which is understandable given the presumed need to protect the dignity of the Companions. However, these laws do not provide exceptions for critical rational inquiry into matters of Islamic law. Therefore, a student of history or jurisprudence who is genuinely interested in better understanding Islamic teachings and studies the paradoxes of the lives of the Companions after the Prophet's demise risks violating this law if they propose reforms to Islamic jurisprudence. However, the pursuit of knowledge in such a situation is crucial for understanding Islamic history and sharia law. The absence of the thesis, antithesis, and synthesis approach in academic knowledge can cause a country to regress and lead to the downfall of human civilization. Secular countries have almost entirely abolished blasphemy laws. Therefore, it is essential to safeguard the pursuit of rational and truthful knowledge, particularly in countries with religious constitutions that have laws prohibiting blasphemy of the state religion.
The strict liability standard applied in blasphemy cases in Pakistan contradicts the natural law principle of rational knowledge. A clear standard should be established to determine when literature or academic works can be considered blasphemous. Currently, blasphemy is punishable by death in Pakistan, but removing the strict liability standard through an amendment could provide protection for knowledge seekers and enable them to make valuable contributions to society.
The West Pakistan Maintenance of Public Order Ordinance (xxxi of 1960) is rooted in constitutional provisions on preventive detention and allows for detention without recourse to courts for up to three months for any published material deemed detrimental to public order. However, whether published material is detrimental to public order is subject to the discretion of authorities. The case of a Turkish novelist, who was prosecuted for inciting hatred against her country in a novel depicting an event in which an ethnic minority was penalized by the Turkish government, highlights how seeking knowledge about genuine emotions in the present may lead to prosecution based on vague interpretations (Birch, 2006). In this case, the novelist did not write anything against her nation, but the authorities deemed the depiction of the event offensive.
The pursuit and dissemination of knowledge is intrinsically linked to free speech, which is considered a fundamental natural right by natural law theorists. However, knowledge is often restricted by notions such as friendly relations between states, contempt of court, and policy concerns. For instance, the constitutional provision of contempt of court in Pakistan can potentially hinder the development of knowledge, leading to an underdeveloped society with little chance of progress for the judiciary. Article 204 of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan defines contempt of court as scandalizing the court, bringing the judge into hatred or ridicule, or prejudicing any matter before the court. Any objective inquiry into judicial proceedings or judgments could be punished with up to six months imprisonment through a summary procedure. This restricts circumspect analyses that may uncover miscarriages of justice, hindering judicial progress (Press Information Department, Ministry of Information and Broadcasting, Government of Pakistan, 2022). However, a liberal contempt law does not seem to interfere with the working of judges who follow strict methodology and rules. It only affects judges that go beyond their mandate.
Similarly, restricting knowledge on the pretext of friendly relations with other states in Pakistan prohibits objective and academic study of such relations. Scientific knowledge should also be free from religious censures in all countries, as conclusions drawn from science should not be subject to religious judgments. This point of separation between science and religion was emphasized by Aquinas in his writings. Scientific knowledge is essential for human survival and is a commonality in humanism.
Women contribute equally to society's development by acquiring scientific knowledge, including medicine. Recently, the Afghan government banned girls' education on religious grounds (BBC News, 2022), which is counterproductive to society's health and knowledge. Therefore, nations worldwide need to recognize the importance of natural law's minimum content and its acceptance to prevent injustice and obscurantism. Natural law theorists and advocates argue that a minimum content of natural law for all nations is necessary to prevent tyranny and primitive thought.
All constitutions worldwide should contain provisions recognizing the unrestricted right to seek rational knowledge. Knowledge, regardless of its spiritual or non-spiritual nature, should be delivered without any inhibitions so that truth may prevail. A related issue to the free acquisition and dissemination of knowledge is the concept of Taqlid in Islamic Law, which mandates the following of a school's opinion in Islamic law without questioning its basis. Moreover, switching between different schools of interpretation is prohibited in Islamic law (Khan, 2006). Natural law jurists, such as Finnis, do not approve of this kind of constraint on thought. Blind adherence to subjective opinions by others may lead to negative consequences if the knowledge derived by a jurist in Islamic law is not the original intention of the Lawmaker, i.e., Allah Almighty, as seen in the Quran and Sunnah.
The fear of Sharia jurists to explain and substantiate their point of view in law in each case seems unwarranted and places constraints on minds in this age of free flow of information and knowledge. Many Muslim countries, such as Saudi Arabia, have adopted a system of interpretation or school of sharia in modern times that appears to be a manifest injustice to critical thought processes because the truth of a decision by any other school is ignored. Therefore, it is proposed that the constitutions of Muslim countries, like Pakistan, should focus on the exposition of reasoned arguments utilizing sources of Islamic law instead of blindly following any school of law in Islam. Each law settled in every school should be subject to critical inquiry. It is, therefore, proposed that the acquisition and imparting of unhindered rational knowledge should be recognized as a fundamental natural right everywhere.

Ensuring the protection of life and associated prerequisites
Life and liberty are integral components of natural law doctrine, which have been discussed by prominent philosophers such as Locke and Rawls (Simmonds, 2008). The concept of "life" encompasses all the essential elements necessary for life, including liberties, recreation, social activities, aesthetics, and a healthy environment, as well as amenities like electricity, gas, and healthcare (Shehla Zia v. WAPDA, 1994 PLD 693 (Supreme Court of Pakistan)). The preservation of life is universally recognized as a natural law standard. However, the laws that are meant to ensure the conditions conducive to a healthy life are often neglected by governments and courts. For example, the chapter on principles of policy in the Constitution of Pakistan that lays down the essentials of life is not subject to the jurisdiction of the courts, as it is considered to be the executive's responsibility. Therefore, the government is responsible for its negligence in this regard. While there are general duties for the masses, governments should be held equally accountable for their failure to support life.
The fundamental right to liberty is enshrined in Article 10 of Pakistan's constitution, which provides a legal remedy to anyone who is illegally held in confinement. However, despite its inclusion in the constitution, illegal confinement of individuals continues to occur in Pakistan, and the courts have remained silent on this issue (Hassan, 2011). In such situations, where the courts prefer to be passive observers, it is suggested that international dispute resolution and humanitarian organizations should play a more active role in promoting and enforcing the core values of natural law. The Constitution of Pakistan's chapter on Principles of Policy lists all the issues related to socio-economic development and other necessities. Therefore, courts cannot intervene in matters that are considered to be policy matters.
The protection of life, including its various manifestations, is a fundamental natural law value that must be effectively safeguarded, according to many natural law scholars. Therefore, the second core value of natural law must provide adequate remedies in case of a breach or failure to protect life, such as providing effective recourse to the law if the government fails to provide good public healthcare despite collecting taxes.
The disregard for this natural law value of self-preservation is also evident in Pakistan's environmental degradation, such as the conversion of natural streams and rivers into dirty sewerage water courses. Ideally, this issue should be reviewed by the courts, with constitutional-level penalties and damages compelling governments and environmental tribunals to take immediate appropriate measures for protecting the environment as part of the right to life. In Pakistan's most beautiful regions, the government fails to notice the sewerage of houses directed towards rivers. Although Pakistan has environmental protection legislation, such as the Environment Protection Act Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, 2014, environmental courts are mostly located in the provincial capital, making them inaccessible to the general public. Without appropriate reforms, there will be little left of the environment for future generations in these most beautiful regions of the Third World.
Personal liberties, including the freedom to wear jeans or a trouser, keep short or long hair, or wear a hijab or not, should not be a concern of the law and must be protected as part of personal liberties. Constitutions should protect these liberties as a basic value of natural law. Preferences towards modesty are subjective, and imposing them through public law has the potential to encroach on basic liberties. Dworkin argues that external preferences that restrict the choices of others should not be part of the law. Similarly, Rawls's conception of basic liberties does not support mandatory laws that impose prejudicial treatment on one's beliefs. Therefore, Iran's mandatory hijab law may be seen as a derogation from the natural law value of life.
Good mental well-being is essential for sustaining life, in addition to physical well-being. Freedom of speech is one of the factors that support mental well-being, including access to positive forms of entertainment such as television programs and public parks. Therefore, the Taliban's ban on women in television dramas can be seen as a step backward. For centuries, Afghans have adhered to the strict custom of women veiling, which is attributed to patriarchal practices in most parts of Afghanistan and Pakistan. The segregation of women from the general public has resulted in an unhealthy culture of child molestation in these societies as a means to gratify unfulfilled desires (Manchanda, 2015). Similar results have been reported in Pakistan's seminary culture . Forcibly isolating women has led to repercussions, as seen in the cases of Afghanistan and Pakistan, where child molestation and homosexuality are rampant and contrary to the law. Constitutional provisions that mandate gender equality in Pakistan and other countries should encourage women's participation in all aspects of life while discouraging their seclusion.
It is proposed that the protection of life, including its associated constituents, such as recreation, sociability, play, a clean environment, peace, and economic justice, be acknowledged and subject to judicial review before superior courts. Furthermore, courts should take a proactive stance in protecting the value of life. According to Rawls, liberties should only be curtailed to the extent that they conflict with other liberties, and in such situations, the emphasis should be on upholding liberties rather than restricting them (Merritt, 1973). Courts should formulate a clear test in this regard and precisely delineate restrictions on liberties. Life and liberty should only be curtailed under extremely limited circumstances, with the grounds for such limitations expressly stated in the law. Therefore, it is asserted that the protection of life as a natural law value in the above terms should be constitutionally upheld worldwide.

Restrictions on human freedoms must be precisely stated
The discussion of the third natural law value relates to Lon L. Fuller's perspective on natural law, which is based on its procedural aspect of internal morality. The principle of prospectivity of laws is an essential principle found in all constitutions. For example, Article 12 of Pakistan's Constitution provides protection against retrospective punishments. However, the issue of intelligibility of laws in relation to their clarity and preciseness has so far failed to attract the attention of jurists and lawmakers as a matter of concern. No constitution provides that all laws must be understandably clear, leaving room for open-endedness that may negatively impact people's rights. The case of the Turkish novelist, as discussed above, is an example of the misapplication of law, wherein the novelist was prosecuted on the grounds of "violating the sanctity of the nation" even though she was exercising her right to freedom of speech. Phrases such as "defense of the country$1" "glory of the country$1" "defense of religion$1" and "security of the country" are kept undefined, allowing for their liberal interpretation to curtail freedom of speech. Fuller's proposition for congruity, intelligibility, and clarity may be interpreted to mean that laws restricting rights, fundamental or otherwise, should be completely comprehensible and leave no room for interpretation in favor of competing values. Non-contradiction requires reconciliation to yield to clarity in laws in terms of precision. Hence, we propose the third value of natural law, i.e., restrictions on human freedoms must be precisely stated. This can be achieved through proper illustrations, explanations, provisos, exemptions in statutes, and clear exposition by courts. No room may be left for openendedness in laws adversely affecting people's rights.
The maintenance of public order law or preventive detentions law framed under the Constitution of Pakistan has a dark history of suppressing dissent, particularly of opposition voices. Numerous prominent politicians and luminaries have faced trials for acting in a manner claimed to be prejudicial to the country's interest (Mian, 1970). In Pakistan, one mainstream party with the majority seats in a provincial legislature was banned for not following federal government directives, on grounds of "acting contrary to the country's sovereignty and integrity" (Lodhi, 1978). All the charges against the apprehended leaders under preventive detention laws were later proved to be false before the courts. In this instance, the vagueness in the law in Pakistan allowed the prosecuting agency arbitrary discretion to charge a person on the grounds of "maintenance of public order". Restrictions on rights need to be precisely stated in accordance with natural law objectives so as to leave no room for misapplication. Executive authority needs to be circumscribed so that the liberties of the people are not eroded. Laws that curtail liberties should not be stated in a vague and general manner. This limitation will enhance people's freedom and is particularly essential in countries coming out of colonial legacies of enslavement. The prisons in countries like Pakistan are overcrowded because many pre-trial detainees are declined bail due to the wide discretionary power given to judges to deny bail (Nekokara, 2022). The vague language of the law can contribute to the misuse of authority and high-handedness. This culture of high-handedness established by colonial institutions is dominant in sub-continent India. To remedy the situation, loosely worded laws must be avoided to prevent their misuse.

Equality ensuring socio-economic justice
The fourth value of natural law is equality, which has confounded philosophers, particularly since the emergence of Marxist philosophy, which aims to create economic equilibrium in society through equality. However, the Marxist experiment has so far failed, with Marxist countries struggling with a lack of efficiency. Countries like Pakistan and India have equality clauses in their constitutions, proclaiming the equality of laws and nondiscrimination towards people. However, bypassing equality clauses is possible by establishing an intelligible differentia (Article 25 of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973). The preamble to the Constitution of India designates India as a socialist democracy, and the Pakistani Constitution has a provision for the elimination of all forms of exploitation to meet the economic ends of the poor and miserly (Article 3, Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan 1973). Nevertheless, poverty remains prevalent in both countries.
Natural law thinkers recognize human vulnerability (Hart & Green, 2012), which has a direct nexus to equality. The lack of a trickle-down effect in the economic system can generate unrest, which is contrary to all objectives of the law. Rawls, while realizing the natural process of economic inequality, recognized the need to direct resources to ameliorate the economically downtrodden. The difference principle and principles for the least disadvantaged in Rawls's theory of justice mandate that the wealth of the rich be directed towards the poor (Simmonds, 2008). Some amount of goods or money parting from the rich does not make a difference to the rich, therefore, it can be distributed in favor of the less wealthy. Such distribution to the less fortunate should provide for some form of a subsistence wage. The idea of a universal subsistence wage for the poor from the pocket of capitalists can be extended as a natural law mandate. This would be a reconciliation between the two extreme effects of capitalist and Marxist models of economics, i.e. the risk of concentration of capital in the hands of the few in third-world countries versus equal distribution of wealth to the people. Recognizing human insufficiencies and equality also means acknowledging the inherent misfortunes that may fall upon anyone, e.g. unemployment and ill health. Competition in the marketplace leads to innovation, and innovation leads to growth and the opening of new market opportunities. All of these will inevitably put more wealth into the hands of shrewd entrepreneurs.
The fruits of successful entrepreneurship should be mediated by corporate social responsibility towards the economically depressed. Ideally, a universal subsistence wage for the impoverished from the pockets of financial players should be mandated in the constitution as a natural law value. It is imperative that natural law values be directly relatable to cumulative life pursuits, i.e., play and sociability. Hart's recognition of human insufficiencies can be a driving force towards recognizing a universal subsistence wage from capitalists to others. This has significant ramifications in present times, as leftist politicians under the influence of Marxism continue to take political advantage of the misery of people.

Respect for individuals' pursuit of spirituality
The right to spirituality is referenced in the natural law philosophies of John Finnis (2011) and Thomas Aquinas (Murphy, 2004). Additionally, natural law theorists endorse spirituality as an element in life for attaining higher consciousness (Hillier, 2010). While some countries believe that state-sanctioned religion has no place in the law, others believe that a state religion should be governed by legislation. It is argued that spirituality should be recognized as a natural right, and elected representatives of designated legislatures should promulgate laws through reasoned debate. Reasoned debate is necessary so that no law with religious grounds may be formulated against scientific rules, knowledge of self, and reality. Nearly all religions demand obligations of commitment to life, an end to exploitation, and upholding justice. Therefore, the right to peaceful exercise of one's spirituality and religion should be considered an essential natural law value. Unfortunately, Shias and Ahmedis are targeted in Pakistan and Afghanistan due to state negligence in protecting citizens' lives and their freedom to practice their own religion (Sayeed, 2018). While their faith is considered deviant from the orthodox view of Islam for being inconsistent with the norms and principles of mainstream theology, their right to practice their spirituality within their own physical confines should be affirmed by law. Even though their public expression of faith may lead to hurtful feelings in the larger Muslim population, their right to profess and practice religion inside physical confines should still be publicly acknowledged by the states as a natural right. Muslim states need to make their masses generally aware of the natural right of any religious group to practice their spirituality as a fundamental value. The Zaheer ud Din vs State, 1993 SCMR 1718 (Supreme Court of Pakistan) Case in Pakistan is an excellent example in this regard as the court affirmed the right of Ahmedis in Pakistan to practice their own spirituality in their places of worship while barring the public practice of the same due to the risk of outraging the general Muslim community's sentiments (Zaheer-ud-Din v State). The exclusive right to practice spirituality in designated places of worship should be recognized as a natural law value in all constitutions. Public display may be regulated, but not outrightly banned so as not to cause disturbance of the peace and inconvenience to the public.
Spirituality is also intrinsically linked to aesthetics. No conception of justice as articulated by contemporary natural law theorists visualizes a negation of the legitimate exercise of enjoyment of aesthetics. The Afghan government's ban on women's entry to public parks is regressive as it denies women the enjoyment of a right to aesthetics (Presse, 2022). The basic structure of every constitution requires an emphasis on the right to leisure through aesthetics as a natural right. This kind of right, encompassing spirituality and aesthetics, may be advocated as a natural right in all countries, particularly those dictated by religious theologies.

Democratic values
Democratic values entail the right to determine who will govern through a popular vote, adherence to the principles of the rule of law such as the protection of fundamental rights, acceptance of differences of opinions, separation of powers, independence of the judiciary, accountability, and more. These natural law values are challenging to attain without true democratic values. Thus, the practice of democratic values should be embraced as a natural law value by individuals and all institutions within society. This should be considered a natural law value because human nature seeks self-determination and resents arbitrary dictates by others.
For a functional democracy, its leaders must possess the requisite knowledge and skills. Generally, unqualified individuals are not hired for jobs they are not skilled in. Similarly, democracies should only elect persons who are knowledgeable in the art of science and jurisprudence in an ideal world. Plato's book, The Republic, presents the philosopher-king idea, which speaks to this point (Emlyn-Jones & Preddy, 2013). The desired ends of natural law cannot be achieved unless qualified individuals capable of reasoned debates hold power in democracies. In this regard, constitutions should establish appropriate qualifications for lawmakers. People in democracies should vote based on a candidate's democratic values. Politicians who do not support reasoned debate and fair speech should be kept out of power. Pakistan and India are examples of this issue, as both countries have been experiencing political divide and religious fanaticism with the same group of people in power. Students and academics have been adversely affected by this divisiveness. In Pakistan, a university student in the heart of the country was lynched to death for having leftist views (Sirajuddin, 2020). Similarly, India has experienced mob killings by religious fanatics with the government's connivance still in power (Ashwani, 2022).
Fostering democratic values among the public, including positive debate and discouragement of nepotism, should be a fundamental value in democracies. Moreover, any dereliction of duty should be punishable through legitimately promulgated measures. The heated political temperatures and religious fanaticism that have become irreparable in most democracies worldwide necessitate accountability and fixing of responsibility so that those involved do not make it to power corridors. This problem can be traced to the eligibility of candidates, as qualified individuals with requisite credentials or higher qualifications are less likely to make erroneous judgments than those lacking such knowledge.

Conclusion
Natural law recognizes that every individual has an intrinsic value and inherent dignity, which must be protected and respected: the right to life, liberty, physical and moral integrity, and equality before the law, regardless of race, ethnicity, religion, sex, orientation sexual or any other personal characteristic. It is imperative that such values may not be compromised. Therefore, continued debate on just laws is necessary. Throughout history, natural law jurists have proposed various core values of natural law in different meanings and settings. However, human civilization continues to suffer in many parts of the world. Laws that deprecate human dignity, restrict fundamental rights, and hamper intellectual development still find their way in statute books. Therefore, it is proposed here that the core values that may form the basis of natural law in the modern world are: (i) rational knowledge, (ii) protection of human life and its necessities, (iii) clear restrictions on human freedoms, (iv) socio-economic justice and equality, (v) respect for individuals' pursuit of spirituality, and (vi) democratic values. The protection of fundamental rights and freedoms is considered a common concern within these six basic values in natural law, which promote respect for dignity.
Practical experiences have shown that legal structures can be misused to the detriment of the values proposed by natural law thinkers. Therefore, a restatement of natural law core values is necessary. Each value mentioned above is equally important for humanity. Gaps in constitutions and laws mandate the need to reformulate and elucidate natural law principles so that they are not compromised in any form. The injustices prevalent around the world warrant a restatement of natural law in the form of core values enshrined in constitutions to take precedence over written laws. These core values should decide the validity of the laws and find appropriate mention in constitutions as a ground for judicial review.

Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Citation information
Cite this article as: Six core values in natural law as a common concern for human development, Usman Quddus & Dennis W. K. Khong, Cogent Social Sciences (2023), 9: 2225828.