No one exists in isolation. The sustenance of every individual person as a human in a society is expediently determined by one's responses to law and morality. Think of a state of lawlessness, a state comparable to Hobbes’ state of nature, where the morality of the people living there is at nadir, it then follows that chaos, anarchy and survival of the fittest takes precedence in such a society. Most of us are familiar with laws but few of us know what they are. The problem of the relationship between law and morality looms large since the dawn of analytic jurisprudence. Earlier legal positivists were of the view that there is no necessary connection between law and morality whereas both concepts are held to be the same by the natural law theorists. When Professor. H. L. A. Hart came to the intellectual scene, a new horizon opened to accommodate the inseparability of the two disciplines, namely: law and morality. Applying the methods of analysis and hermeneutics one discovers that the early legal positivists championed by the utilitarians like Jeremy Bentham, John Austin, Hans Keelson, Joseph Raz are morally arbitrary and indifferent to reality when we critically consider their no necessary connection thesis. Hart is widely known for his discussion and views about the relationship between law and morality. As a starting point, he acknowledge that there are various ways that law is intimately connected with morals but quickly asserts that this truth if not well considered may illicitly be taken as a warrant for different kinds of positions. From all indication, for Hart, law and morality are bonded together in what can be described as mutual complementarity rather than severing one from the other. Hart’s theory mediates between the theories uphold by natural law theorists and the early legal positivist, otherwise known as exclusive legal positivists. And the conclusion is that the thought and idea of Hart on the separability thesis is that there are some legal syste