Introduction:

 

         We as a society have always been taught to follow the rules. From the moment we enter school, we learn to raise our hands, wait our turn, and colour inside the lines. As we grow older, these rules become more complex, like curfews, regulations, and the actual laws that govern our towns, states and nations. These boundaries are meant to protect us. But what happens when they don't? What happens when we have no idea what we're being protected from? What happens when we are forced to follow something we don't believe in?

 

         I remember questioning a rule once. All I asked was a simple, "Why?" because the restriction didn't make sense and felt unfair. And the answer I got wasn't an explanation. It was just a simple shrug: "That's just how it is."

 

         That sentence truly hurts for most to hear. It tells you that the rule isn't up for discussion, that fairness isn't the point, and that obedience matters more than understanding. And most of all, it tells you that your voice doesn't matter.

 

         I carried that moment with me for a long, long time. Not because I wanted to rebel, but because I wanted to understand. Why do we accept systems that don't listen? Why do we treat authority as unquestionable, even when it's clearly flawed?

 

         Personally, my closest encounter with how the law actually functions didn't happen through a textbook. It happened through a family law dispute that turned my life upside down. Under the Australian Family Law Act, when parents separate, the court is legally required to make decisions based on the "best interests of the child." On paper, that rule sounds great. It's meant to protect us. But during the mediation and court process, I realised how the law actually works in practice. It treats children like objects to be moved around rather than human beings. A court-appointed counsellor who only spoke to me for an hour wrote a massive report deciding where I should live, completely ignoring my actual school routine, my friends, and my entire life. When I tried to tell the adults that their plan didn't work for me, the system basically filtered my voice out because a judge or a lawyer supposedly "knew better."

 

         This experience was a perfect example of how the law can look orderly on the outside, but fail on the inside. The court was working exactly as intended to create a stable legal agreement between adults, but it completely ignored the person it was supposed to be protecting. This is exactly when it is appropriate to challenge the boundaries of a rule. When a legal system claims to protect you but shuts you out of the conversation, blind obedience stops making sense. Challenging that boundary isn't about causing the chaos. It's about forcing the system to listen to who it's actually serving. We shouldn't just accept a court order that ruins our stability because, in reality, we have a right to push back, demand to be heard by the judge, and ask for independent children's lawyers who actually listen to us.

 

         This is where my understanding of the rule of law comes in. The World Justice Project defines it as "a durable system of laws, institutions, norms and community commitment" (World Justice Project). But durability alone doesn't make a law just. A system can be orderly and still be completely wrong if it silences the populace it governs.

 

         Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. once wrote, "One has a moral responsibility to disobey unjust laws." For a young person, that responsibility doesn't mean breaking things. Sometimes, it means refusing to accept silence or a shrug as an answer. It means believing that fairness matters more than tradition. It means shaping the law so it reflects true justice, not just unarguable authority.

 

Conclusion:

 

         I haven't rewritten public policies or argued in front of a judge yet (emphasis on the word "yet" because I fully intend to do something like that one day). But I've asked questions. I've challenged assumptions because I refuse to accept "that's just how it is" as the end of the conversation. And that, I believe, is how the rule of law begins to evolve. I want to be a lawyer because I believe the law should be a tool for justice, not just a mechanism of control. I don't want to enforce silence; I just want to amplify voices. I believe in rules that protect, not punish, and systems that listen, not silence. The rule of law shaped me to be who I am today. So now I intend to shape it back.

​

Bibliography:​

​

Family Law Act 1975: https://www.ag.gov.au/families-and-marriage/children-and-family-law

 

Rule of Law: https://worldjusticeproject.org/about-us/overview/what-rule-law

 

King Jr., Martin Luther, 'Letter from Birmingham Jail' (1963): https://www.africa.upenn.edu/Articles_Gen/Letter_Birmingham.html