LEGAL POSITIVISM as articulated by H.L.A. HART includes the 'SEPARATION THESIS':

1. SEPARATION THESIS is the central tenet of LEGAL POSITIVISM (Bentham, Austin, Kelsen, Hart, Raz). 2. It holds that there is NO NECESSARY CONNECTION between LAW (what the law IS) and MORALITY (what the law OUGHT TO BE). 3. Implications: 4. (i) A MORALLY BAD LAW may still be a VALID LAW (e.g. Nazi laws were 'law' even if morally repugnant); 5. (ii) MORAL CRITIQUE of law is a DIFFERENT exercise from LEGAL ANALYSIS; 6. (iii) WHAT THE LAW IS can be determined by SOCIAL FACTS (rule of recognition). 7. HART-FULLER DEBATE (1958, Harvard Law Review) — Lon Fuller's natural law response: there is a 'morality of law' (procedural natural law) — generality, publicity, prospectivity, clarity, consistency, possibility, stability, congruence between rules and administration. 8. CONTRAST with NATURAL LAW: 'an unjust law is no law at all' (St. Augustine, Aquinas). 9. Hence option B is correct. _Source: Legal Research Methodology + Jurisprudence — H.L.A. Hart's Separation Thesis; Hart-Fuller debate (1958)_