Research is much concerned with proper fact finding, analysis and evaluation — Do you agree?

1. Introduction

Research is a systematic, organised and objective process of inquiry aimed at discovering, interpreting and revising facts. It is not merely a collection of information; it is a disciplined search for truth. The statement that research is much concerned with proper fact finding, analysis and evaluation is therefore substantially correct. These three elements form the core of every scientific and legal inquiry, and they distinguish genuine research from casual observation or opinion.

2. Meaning of the three elements

Fact finding means the systematic collection of reliable data, evidence, statutes, precedents, customs and other materials relevant to the research problem. Facts are the raw material of research.

Analysis means the breaking down of collected facts into their component parts, classification, comparison, and the discovery of relationships, causes and patterns among them.

Evaluation means critical judgement — assessing the validity, reliability, relevance and weight of the facts and the conclusions drawn from them, and testing them against accepted standards, logic and legal principles.

3. Reasons in support of the statement

(a) Research begins with facts, not assumptions. Every research problem is formulated on the basis of observed facts. A legal researcher studying, for example, the delay in the dispensation of justice must first gather facts — number of pending cases, duration of trials, causes of adjournment — before any conclusion can be drawn. Without proper fact finding, research becomes speculation.

(b) Facts must be proper and verified. The word "proper" is significant. Research insists on authentic, relevant and unbiased facts. Secondary and hearsay materials must be verified against primary sources such as statutes, gazettes, reported judgments and field data. This is why the doctrine of stare decisis and the hierarchy of legal sources matter in legal research.

(c) Analysis converts information into knowledge. Facts alone are meaningless unless analysed. Analysis involves classification, comparison, induction and deduction. For instance, in comparative constitutional research, mere reproduction of the provisions of two constitutions is not research; the analytical comparison of their underlying principles is.

(d) Evaluation gives research its critical and scientific character. Research does not stop at description. It evaluates — whether a law has achieved its objective, whether a precedent is still good law, whether a policy is just and effective. Evaluation supplies the "why" and "so what" of research, and it is the basis of recommendation and reform.

(e) These elements ensure objectivity and reliability. Because research proceeds through fact finding, analysis and evaluation, its findings are verifiable and repeatable. This is the essence of the scientific method and the reason courts and legislatures rely on research reports, law reform commission studies and empirical legal studies.

(f) They are interlinked and mutually dependent. Fact finding without analysis is sterile; analysis without proper facts is misleading; and both without evaluation lack purpose. The three stages together constitute the research process — problem identification, hypothesis, data collection, analysis, interpretation and conclusion.

4. Qualification of the statement

The statement should not be read too narrowly. Research is also concerned with the formulation of theory, the construction of hypotheses, the development of methodology and the advancement of knowledge for its own sake. In doctrinal legal research, the emphasis may fall more on analysis and evaluation of legal norms than on empirical fact finding. Similarly, in pure or basic research, the search for general principles may outweigh immediate fact finding. Thus the three elements are central but not exhaustive.

5. Conclusion

It is submitted that the statement is largely true. Proper fact finding supplies the foundation, analysis builds the structure, and evaluation gives the edifice its value and direction. Research without these three elements loses its scientific character and becomes mere compilation. At the same time, research also embraces theorisation and methodology, so the statement should be understood as describing the essential core rather than the whole of research.

Doctrinal Research Approach

Definition: Doctrinal research (also called "armchair research" or "black-letter research") is a method of legal research that focuses on the study of law as it exists in statutes, judicial decisions, regulations, and legal doctrines. It involves the systematic analysis, interpretation, and exposition of legal rules and principles through primary legal sources (legislation, case law) and secondary sources (commentaries, textbooks, journal articles). The researcher works primarily with legal texts rather than with empirical data collected from the field. Its central aim is to clarify what the law is on a given point, how it has developed, and how it applies to particular situations.

Key features:

• Relies on library-based study of legal materials.
• Concerned with the "law in books" rather than the "law in action."
• Uses techniques of interpretation, analogy, deduction, and logical reasoning.
• Aims at exposition, systematisation, and criticism of legal rules.

Is Doctrinal Research More Used in Legal Research?

Yes, doctrinal research is the most widely used approach in the field of legal research, for the following reasons:

1. Nature of law as a discipline: Law is primarily a normative discipline concerned with rules, rights, duties, and obligations. Understanding and interpreting these rules is the core task of legal scholarship, which doctrinal method serves directly.

2. Foundation for all legal work: Judges, lawyers, legislators, and administrators all engage in doctrinal analysis daily — interpreting statutes, distinguishing precedents, and applying principles. It is thus the basic "lawyer's method."

3. Dominance in legal education and scholarship: Traditional legal writing — commentaries, case notes, textbooks, and most law journal articles — is doctrinal in character. Curricula in most law schools emphasise the study of statutes and cases.

4. Practical utility: It provides authoritative statements of the law needed for advising clients, drafting legislation, and deciding cases. Empirical or socio-legal research often builds upon doctrinal findings.

5. Feasibility: It requires mainly access to legal sources and requires less time, money, and fieldwork compared to empirical research, making it accessible to most researchers and students.

However, it is not the only approach. Modern legal research increasingly combines doctrinal method with empirical (socio-legal) research, comparative method, and interdisciplinary approaches to study the "law in action." Nevertheless, in terms of volume and tradition, doctrinal research remains the most extensively used method in legal research.

Research Proposal

Definition

A research proposal is a formal, written document prepared by a researcher before conducting a study, which outlines the research problem, its objectives, the rationale for the study, the methods to be used, and the expected outcomes. It serves as a plan or blueprint of the proposed research and is submitted to an academic institution, supervisor, or funding agency for approval and support. In legal research, it specifies the legal issue to be investigated, the doctrinal or empirical approach to be followed, and the sources of legal materials to be consulted.

Main Ingredients (Components) of a Research Proposal

1. Title of the Research — A clear, concise and specific title that reflects the subject and scope of the study.

2. Introduction / Background of the Study — Brief background information placing the research problem in its legal, social or theoretical context.

3. Statement of the Problem — A precise statement of the issue or gap in existing knowledge that the research seeks to address.

4. Objectives of the Research — Specific, measurable goals the study intends to achieve.

5. Research Questions / Hypotheses — The questions to be answered or the tentative propositions to be tested.

6. Rationale / Significance of the Study — Justification of why the research is necessary and how it will contribute to law, policy or academia.

7. Literature Review — A summary and critical evaluation of existing literature, showing the gap the study fills.

8. Scope and Limitations — The boundaries of the study (time, place, subject matter) and its limitations.

9. Research Methodology — The research design, methods (doctrinal, empirical, comparative, etc.), sources of data (primary and secondary), sampling technique, and tools of data collection and analysis.

10. Chapter Scheme / Organization of the Study — A brief outline of how the study will be structured into chapters.

11. Time Schedule (Work Plan) — A timetable showing the phases of the research and their duration.

12. Budget / Estimated Cost — The financial resources required, where applicable.

13. Expected Outcomes / Conclusion — The anticipated findings or contribution of the research.

14. References / Bibliography — A list of sources cited or to be consulted, in a standard citation format.

Qualities of a Good Questionnaire

A questionnaire is a structured set of questions used to collect primary data from respondents. For research to yield valid and reliable results, the questionnaire must possess the following qualities:

1. Clarity and Simplicity Questions should be short, simple, and easily understood by respondents. Technical jargon, complex words and ambiguous terms should be avoided so that every respondent interprets the question in the same way.

2. Relevance Every question must be directly related to the research objectives. Irrelevant or unnecessary questions waste the respondent's time and reduce the quality of data.

3. Brevity The questionnaire should be as short as possible. A lengthy questionnaire causes respondent fatigue, leading to incomplete or careless responses.

4. Objectivity Questions should be neutral and free from bias. Leading questions that suggest a particular answer (e.g., "Don't you agree that…?") should be avoided.

5. Proper Sequence Questions should follow a logical order — from general to specific, and from easy to difficult. Personal or sensitive questions should be placed at the end.

6. Pre-tested (Pre-tested/Pilot Tested) A good questionnaire is tested on a small sample before final use. This helps identify unclear, irrelevant or defective questions and allows necessary corrections.

7. Adequate Coverage It should cover all aspects of the research problem so that no important information is left out.

8. Appropriate Form and Structure It should contain clear instructions, proper spacing, and a mix of open-ended and closed-ended questions as required by the study. Closed-ended questions are easier to tabulate; open-ended questions allow free responses.

9. Courtesy and Ethical Tone The questionnaire should begin with a polite introduction, assure confidentiality, and avoid questions that hurt the sentiments or privacy of respondents.

10. Easy Tabulation and Analysis The questions should be framed in such a way that responses can be easily coded, classified, tabulated and statistically analysed.

Conclusion A good questionnaire is clear, concise, relevant, unbiased, logically sequenced and pre-tested. Such qualities ensure accurate, reliable and meaningful data for the research study.

Short Notes

a) Research Design

Research design is the overall plan or blueprint that a researcher prepares before conducting research. It sets out the strategy, structure and strategy of the inquiry so that the research question can be answered reliably. It is the plan that connects the research problem to the collection, measurement and analysis of data.

Main elements:

• Purpose of the study — exploratory, descriptive or explanatory (causal).
• Unit of analysis — individuals, groups, institutions or legal texts.
• Time dimension — cross-sectional (one point of time) or longitudinal (over a period).
• Sampling design — who will be studied and how they will be selected.
• Data collection methods — survey, interview, observation, document study.
• Data analysis plan — qualitative or quantitative techniques.

Types: exploratory, descriptive and explanatory (causal) designs; in legal research, doctrinal (library-based) and non-doctrinal (empirical) designs are common.

Importance: It reduces arbitrariness, saves time and cost, guides the collection of relevant data, and makes the findings valid and comparable. A faulty design leads to unreliable conclusions, however good the data may be.

---

b) Research Report

A research report is the final written document in which the researcher presents the problem, methods, findings and conclusions of the study in an organised form. It is the visible output of the whole research process and the means by which the findings are communicated to readers, supervisors, policy-makers and the academic community.

Structure of a standard report:

1. Preliminary pages — title page, certificate of approval, declaration, acknowledgements, table of contents, list of tables and abbreviations.
2. Main body —
   • Introduction: background, statement of the problem, objectives, research questions, significance, scope and limitations.
   • Literature review and theoretical framework.
   • Research methodology: design, population and sample, tools, and methods of analysis.
   • Data presentation and analysis: tables, figures, interpretation.
   • Findings, conclusions and recommendations.
3. Reference material — bibliography/references and appendices (questionnaire, interview schedule, legal provisions).

Qualities of a good report: clarity, objectivity, logical organisation, accuracy of facts and citations, appropriate language, and freedom from personal bias.

Importance: It preserves the research for future use, provides evidence for policy and law reform, and enables other researchers to verify or build upon the work.

---

c) Primary Data

Primary data means data collected by the researcher himself, for the first time, from original sources for the specific purpose of the study at hand. Such data are fresh and have not been previously collected or published by anyone else.

Sources:

• Persons — interviews, questionnaires, focus group discussions, observation of behaviour.
• Documents — statutes, ordinances, regulations, court judgments, treaties, contracts, registered deeds and other original legal records.
• Institutions — records of courts, ministries, police, land revenue offices, banks and NGOs.

Methods of collection: observation, interview, questionnaire/schedule, and case/document study.

Advantages:

• Data are original, first-hand and tailored to the research objectives.
• The researcher controls the quality, scope and reliability of the data.
• Useful where no secondary data exist on the topic.

Disadvantages:

• Time-consuming and costly.
• Requires trained researchers and adequate resources.
• Not always possible to cover a large population.

Contrast with secondary data: Secondary data are already collected and published by others (books, journals, government reports, census, court statistics) and are cheaper and quicker to use, but may not exactly fit the research problem. In practice, legal research often combines both.

---

d) Citation

Citation is the practice of formally acknowledging the source of information, ideas, words or data used in a piece of academic or legal writing. It tells the reader where the material came from and enables verification of the source. Failure to cite is plagiarism, which is a serious academic offence.

Purposes:

• To give credit to the original author.
• To allow readers to trace and verify the source.
• To strengthen the credibility of the writer's argument.
• To avoid plagiarism and respect copyright.

Common styles: APA, MLA, Chicago, and in law, the Bluebook and OSCOLA. Nepali legal writing commonly follows the Nepal Law Society citation pattern or the Bluebook.

Examples:

• Book: Laxmi Prasad Mainali, Constitutional Law of Nepal (2nd edn, Pairavi Prakashan 2075 BS) 45.
• Case: Sujata Manandhar v Office of the Prime Minister, NKP 2060, Decision No 6823.
• Statute: The Constitution of Nepal 2072, art 18(1).

Elements of a legal citation: name of the case or author, title of the work, edition, publisher, year and page number. Citations appear in footnotes, endnotes or a reference list, and must be consistent throughout the work.

---

e) Research Proposal

A research proposal is a written plan submitted by a researcher before starting a study, describing what is to be researched, why and how. It is prepared to obtain approval from a supervisor or institution and, often, to secure funding. It is the roadmap of the proposed research.

Contents:

1. Title of the research — clear, specific and researchable.
2. Introduction/background — context of the problem.
3. Statement of the problem and research questions.
4. Objectives of the study.
5. Rationale/significance and scope and limitations.
6. Literature review — what is already known and the research gap.
7. Theoretical/conceptual framework.
8. Research methodology — design, population, sample and sampling technique, data collection tools, and analysis methods.
9. Chapter scheme/outline of the proposed work.
10. Time schedule and budget (where required).
11. Preliminary bibliography.

Importance: It defines the scope of the study, guides the researcher at every stage, helps secure approval and funds, and prevents the researcher from drifting away from the objectives. A clear, feasible and well-justified proposal is the first condition of sound research.