JOHN AUSTIN's COMMAND THEORY OF LAW (1832) posits law as:

1. JOHN AUSTIN (1790-1859), English legal philosopher, founded analytical jurisprudence with 'The Province of Jurisprudence Determined' (1832). 2. COMMAND THEORY: 3. (i) LAW = COMMAND of a POLITICAL SOVEREIGN backed by SANCTION; 4. (ii) Sovereign = the determinate human superior whom the bulk of population HABITUALLY OBEYS, but who does not habitually obey anyone else; 5. (iii) Sanctions = evil consequences for disobedience. 6. AUSTIN'S DISTINCTIONS: 7. (a) Laws PROPERLY SO CALLED = positive law (analytical jurisprudence subject); 8. (b) Laws IMPROPERLY SO CALLED = laws of God (theology), natural laws (physics), positive morality (ethics). 9. HART'S CRITIQUE: (i) law as commands fails to explain enabling rules (contracts, wills); (ii) custom doesn't fit the model; (iii) the unobeying sovereign doesn't account for constitutional democracies; (iv) commands by threats can't explain legal obligation as opposed to coercion. 10. Hence option B is correct. _Source: Legal Research Methodology + Jurisprudence — John Austin, 'The Province of Jurisprudence Determined' (1832)_