.
Magna Carta: its historical impact is undeniable; its impact on current government policy is less easy to detect
Celebrations to mark the 800th anniversary of Magna Carta, which was sealed in June 1215, are now well underway. The festivities this month include an international conference on the rule law, which has prompted a protest by the Justice Alliance (see news page 5). What, you might ask, is the relevance of a document, which was mainly about protecting the interests of a medieval elite, to the world today?
King John was forced to agree the terms of Magna Carta to avert an all-out civil war between the Crown and disgruntled barons. Things came to a head during John’s rule, because of his increasingly tyrannical behaviour in using taxes to raise the funds he needed to try to win back territories in France.
In its original 1215 form, the charter was a resounding failure. Within months of its being sealed, John had it annulled by the pope and he was at war again with his barons. John died in October 1216, and his successor, Henry III, re-issued versions of the charter, to reassure the nobility of his intention to rule fairly, as did his son Edward I.
‘It is clause 40 which is the most articulate statement of principle: “To no one will we sell, to no one will we deny or delay, right or justice”’
In the context of medieval history, Magna Carta can be seen as nothing more than a statement of good intentions, as the subsequent versions of the document did not include the enforcement clause, which appeared in the first version (clause 61). This provided for a council of 25 barons who could force the king to comply with the charter, if he was set to renege on it.
Magna Carta’s main legacy is in the ideas it articulated. So while the enforcement clause was dropped, the council of barons it originally envisaged can be viewed as a predecessor of parliamentary control of taxation and the principle of no taxation without consent.
Sandwiched in the text among clauses which mainly deal with the baron’s concerns about tax and inheritance, are three clauses which can be regarded as the roots of what we would now refer to as the rule of law. Clause 39 states that free men (they made up around half the population) should not be subject to a detriment without proper legal process, and clause 38 expresses the need for ‘trustworthy witnesses’, rather than relying on an accusation alone to ‘put anyone to law’. It is perhaps clause 40 which is the most articulate statement of principle: ‘To no one will we sell, to no one will we deny or delay, right or justice.’
Down the centuries the ideas expressed in Magna Carta have informed constitutional documents such as the 1776 United States Declaration of Independence, and political movements, including parliament’s challenge to Charles I, a monarch who demonstrated a similar tyrannical predisposition as that of his medieval predecessor. It is, therefore, unforgivable, that this month’s conference on the rule of law seems to have been conceived as nothing more than a crass attempt to promote the UK legal industry internationally on the back of the 800th anniversary.
With the introduction of universal suffrage and creation of the welfare state, society made a definitive break with our feudal past, so it would be trite to draw parallels with the country ruled by the Plantagenet dynasty and the current government. However, the last few years have seen retrograde steps, such as the cuts to legal aid and advice services, which have seriously diminished access to justice for many people.
Magna Carta’s main legacy is that its ideas were taken up and reinterpreted by successive generations to guarantee the rule of law. Eight hundred years on, LAG hopes it can prove inspirational again in seeking to create a legal system which is open to all regardless of status or means.