The application of the rule of law can be hindered by

Step 1: Analyze the question The question asks which of the options can hinder (obstruct) the rule of law.

Step 2: Explain the concept The rule of law, popularised by A.V. Dicey, rests on three principles:

1. Supremacy of the law: no one is punished except for a breach of law.
2. Equality before the law: everyone, regardless of status, is subject to the same laws and courts.
3. Fundamental human rights are protected by the courts.

Anything that exempts certain people from the ordinary law or its processes works against these principles.

Step 3: Evaluate the options

• A. Age of an individual: Age may affect the type of punishment (for example, juvenile courts), but it does not generally block the application of law. It is not a major hindrance.
• B. Free press: A free press supports the rule of law by exposing abuses and holding officials accountable. It does not hinder it.
• C. Religion of an individual: The law applies regardless of religion, so this is not a legal exemption. (Religious discrimination would be a violation, but religion itself is not a built-in hindrance.)
• D. Diplomatic immunity: Diplomats are exempt from arrest and prosecution under the laws of the host country. This breaks the principle of equality before the law, so it is a recognised limitation on the rule of law.

Step 4: Answer Diplomatic immunity is the correct choice.

Exam tip: Remember the usual limitations to the rule of law: diplomatic immunity, parliamentary privilege, immunity of the President/Governors (Section 308 of the 1999 Constitution), and military rule/decrees. If an option names any of these, it is very likely the answer.