The purpose of this article is to address the methodology for the establishment of good-governance. We are not going to employ the tight technical characteristic and/or interpretation in our defense although; we would suppose to use easy and descriptive approach to share some of the few points in tendency to good-governance. we would need to elucidate what we assume in relation to the "good-governance" that is "any abnormality with reference to Laws would be opposite of good-governance and normality would be good-governance " Normality is the smoothness of system where every individual and institution functioning in accordance with law and law is balanced and effective with the required objective of the state and it has definite explanation to deal with each kind of matter pertaining to social, economic, political, religious, geographic etc issues.

We assume that an "ideal" good-governance would be "where every individual and institution participates to attain the overall objective of state in accordance with the law with zero percent rate of irregularity"

Every single irregularity or unlawfulness or illegality or misconduct or violation or abuse or infringement or all at a time would be consider as bad-governance, it means number of unlawfulness could be use as the indicator for the benchmark of governance. It further describes that the true statistics of crime from every sector of society would determine the degree of governance.

If the society is crimeless and it also protects the rights of individuals and institutions it would employ that the same society has good governance and in inverse it would be in bad governance.  This is not the complex science or calculation; it's very easy to understand even by the common-man.

And, when two or more than two individuals gather at one place they require a set of direction for passing life cycle and of-course an agency who can establish the sovereignty of laws.  Moreover, the state with all its organs is almost responsible for the establishment of sovereignty of law with absolute-neutrality and putting every individual and institution for the achievement of state national and international objective.          

If what you read above is valid than in current world with era of modernity no any state exists who could guarantee the "ideal" degree of good-governance, even nation(s) from higher per capita income.

Good governance is not "only" and "exclusive" piece of work for government although the same would suppose to be a joint adventure of government to common-masses and vise-versa. Mainly within responsibilities, government possesses the bulky share because of its custodianship of state resources. Generally the governance is the subject of "implementation" of state law with cent-percent neutrality and guarantee the rights of each individuals to institutions and vise versa.

Implementation of state law with neutrality is not the easy job because the governance has been subordinated by "political government" with identifiable and established "political-party-good" with habit of regret for rest of their good, this sensitive link has absolutely negative impact over the performance of good-governance due to limited scope of this article we would only discussing the methodological issues.

Keeping above in consideration, we need to describe at least this question that "how government could guarantee the good-governance? "  The same question addresses the methodological pertaining to good governance in reply of above query we argue that there would be two methods for functioning the good governance first, the "method-of-legality", its means that state would suppose to construct the law with its accurate and acceptable explanation in each direction of life cycle for individual to institution with vise-versa and its neutral implementation on society. The same method has one more challenge that the state would suppose to establish its own conception-of-good and objective for its existence and converting the same conception-of-good and state-objective into form of state law it means significant correlation need to be acquire in stated indicators and on the other side it needs the common-consensus in state regarding the conception of good, state objective and laws from down to up and up to down steam. Existence of disagreement in any of above would lead the hurdles in fairness of governance implementation and symmetric balance would leads the smoothness in same.

Let's suppose that the above complex and sensitive stage has been pass-out successfully and an accurate balance has been ensured with stability the next phase to establish the sovereignty of Law.

Authorities would need to formulate the institutions for the implementation of Law, now let's experience the same situation for clarification of our argument that multi million individuals are at one place (state) with multiple religion, with multiple culture, language and race, with billions of economic activities with limitless social interaction, with trade of international community and with phase of development   and so on within all that state would need to guarantee the obedience of law. Which look very difficult job.

Commonly human is the responded to the law and it has unpredictable conduct and it has been noticed that usually and frequently he violate the law in his immediate favor. When the state need to protect the rule of law it employ to punish or action against the responded of violation and when the society has very large domain normally it linger difficult to ensure the rule of law, as the current era is the best example of this situation, like in Pakistan, we have appropriate law addresses the each segment of life from individual to institutions and vise-versa but there is serious drawback of governance or the state could not even ensure the rule of law. Or, there is another view that abundance of rules and regulations condense the ability to successfully implement the laws, most the scholars and policymakers argue that successful implementation of law is directly linked and subject to degree of economic-resource, as greater means of resources would help the policymakers and authorities to establish the rule of law moreover, state could not monitor the each individual, institutions and activity that either it is functioning in accordance with law. Or state put its representative at every-where at every economic-cum-social-cum-religious-cum-etc activity with enforcement along-with equipments which I think practically not possible. Universally it is crucial paradox in acquiring the good governance. In general, liberal-democratic form of constitutions acquire massive laws and direction which in normal condition with scare of resources and infrastructure couldn't be manageable, most of political-economist believe that poverty and unequal distribution one of the foremost cause and effect of bad-governance or the same phenomena has dual consequential policy actions first, to remove the deficient economic characteristic and enhance the resources secondly, contribute the governance process or both simultaneously, this conventional method has pretty complex and challenging professional practices, it also has the significant probability of default and irregularity because of its unique nature of dependency on linked indicators. If the method of legality is difficult to implement than how could a state guarantee the good governance? 

The answer is simple and easy to implement by "method-of-morality" and it has been establish at least within academic discourse and somehow practically that the "morality" has inverse relation with "legality" if the magnitude of morality increase it would lead to decrease the legality.

Morality has direct interaction with every responded of society either responded is single or in group or it has institutional getup, it treat the responded how to behave and how to perform his duties and prefer the lesson of respect and sacrifice, it has metaphysical foundations for reasoning the morality in reference to history, culture, religion and convention. Furthermore, it has not the procedures of massive written laws with framework of punishment although it has moral horizontal and pressure to enforce the responded for obey and respect the others, it's not the mean the discourse of morality is lawless, it has necessary laws for daily life and rest would be on subject to morality. When the cycle of life has been enhanced by the market procedures it needs the guideline for new activities especially in economic and social discourse, expansion of society by virtue of market reduces the domain of morality it has directly negative impact over the supply of good governance. If every individual within state obey the morality codes and respect the others than I am confident that there would be no need for several legislations, it would also support the government in implementation of others law because construction of laws has been derived by any kind of violation in society and violation would only be tackle by enhancing the morality and model of legal-punishment wouldn't produce good as the morality suppose to be.

We reach on this conclusion that, good governance could only be maintain by enhancing the morality without the same either a society has limitless legislations it couldn't guarantee the good governance, because abundance of laws and its implementation is even tough for the policymakers.