Magna Carta | Still Relevant?

In today’s political/legal environment, is it the case that we have drifted, perhaps significantly, perhaps irretrievably, from the principles that emerged from the social/political/legal dynamics at play in England in 1215 and ultimately manifested in the Great Charter?

I was inspired to write on this subject in response to a discussion between someone who I admire and follow, Neil Oliver, and a guest he invited to participate in a video he posted on his YouTube channel. The second source of inspiration was what appears, for many, to be an erosion or compromise of the rights and freedoms that most people see as absolutely essential in a free society.

Oliver’s guest was constitutional researcher William Keyte. The remarkable discussion revolved around the question of the nature of ‘constitution’ and how, we the people, choose to govern ourselves. Accordingly, if the subjects of we the people, governance, freedom and justice are topics of interest to you then I would suggest that this is a discussion you do not want to miss. The link to the video, which I enthusiastically recommend, is set out at the bottom of this post.

The Rule of Law

The Magna Carta, also known as the Great Charter, is a historical document that was signed in 1215 by King John of England. It is considered one of the most important legal documents in the history of democracy and has had a lasting impact on the development of constitutional law. The Magna Carta was a result of a power struggle between King John and his barons, who were unhappy with his oppressive rule and high taxes. The barons forced the king to agree to a set of principles that would limit his power and protect their rights.

One of the key principles expressed in the Magna Carta was the idea that the king is not above the law. This was a revolutionary concept at the time, as monarchs were traditionally seen as having absolute power, the source of that power being the ‘Divine Right of Kings’. The Magna Carta established the principle that even the king must abide by the law and that his actions can be challenged in court. This laid the foundation for the rule of law and the concept of constitutional government.

Another important principle expressed in the Magna Carta is the idea of due process of law. The document states that no free man shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property without the judgment of his peers or the law of the land. This principle ensured that individuals had the right to a fair trial and protection from arbitrary government actions. It also introduced the concept of habeas corpus, which prevents unlawful detention by requiring that a person be brought before a court to determine the legality of their imprisonment.

The Magna Carta also established the principle of taxation by consent. The document states that the king cannot levy taxes without the consent of his barons, who represented the interests of the people. This principle laid the foundation for representative government and the idea that taxation should be based on the consent of the governed.

The principles expressed in the Magna Carta are important because they laid the foundation for modern constitutional government and the protection of individual rights. The document influenced the development of constitutional law in England and later in other countries, including the United States. The ideas of limited government, the rule of law, and individual rights that are enshrined in the Magna Carta are fundamental to the functioning of a free and democratic society.

In conclusion, the Magna Carta is a landmark document that established important principles that have shaped the course of history. Its influence can be seen in the development of constitutional government, the protection of individual rights, and the rule of law. It has been suggested that a ‘constitution’ reflects, or should reflect, the principles inherent in ‘natural law’ and that understanding is what led to what was ultimately reflected in the Great Charter. In other words what, in fact, became enshrined in Magna Carta, was the desire to have natural law principles reflected in the English constitution.

The principles expressed in the Magna Carta are still relevant today and continue to inspire those who seek to uphold the values of freedom, justice and democracy. Accordingly, if these principles should be and, in fact, are still relevant, questions that perhaps ought to be asked are: have these principles been compromised? Have we lost what was enshrined in Magna Carta and, if that is the case, is it possible to restore those principles to a place where they are honoured and effectively, in an operational sense, meaningful?

What Is Natural Law?

Natural law is a concept that has been debated and discussed for centuries, with varying interpretations and applications in different contexts. As suggested above, was Magna Carta a reflection of what was inherently understood as the essence and basis of self-governance? In its simplest form, natural law refers to a set of moral principles that are inherent in nature and can be discovered through reason and observation. These principles are believed to be universal and timeless, applying to all human beings regardless of culture, religion or societal norms.

The origins of natural law can be traced back to ancient Greek philosophy, particularly the teachings of Socrates, Plato and Aristotle. These philosophers believed that there existed a higher order of justice and morality that transcended human laws and customs. According to them, natural law was based on the idea of a rational and harmonious universe, where certain ethical principles governed human behavior.

One of the key proponents of natural law in the Christian tradition was St. Thomas Aquinas, a medieval theologian and philosopher. Aquinas argued that natural law was derived from God’s eternal law and could be known through human reason. He believed that natural law provided a moral framework for human conduct, guiding individuals towards the pursuit of virtue and the common good.

In the modern era, natural law has been influential in shaping political and legal theory. The Enlightenment thinkers, such as John Locke and Jean-Jacques Rousseau, drew upon the concept of natural law to justify their ideas of individual rights and social contract theory. They believed that natural law provided a foundation for a just and democratic society, where the rights of individuals were protected and respected.

In the realm of legal theory, natural law has been used to critique and challenge unjust laws and practices. Legal scholars like Lon Fuller and Ronald Dworkin have argued that natural law principles can serve as a moral compass for evaluating the legitimacy of legal norms and decisions. They have contended that laws that violate natural law are inherently unjust and should be reformed or abolished.

Despite its enduring relevance, natural law has faced criticism and skepticism from various quarters. Critics argue that natural law is too abstract and subjective, making it difficult to apply in concrete situations. They question the universality of natural law principles, pointing to the diversity of moral beliefs and values across different cultures and societies.

In conclusion, natural law is a complex and multifaceted concept that has been a subject of philosophical inquiry and debate for centuries. It encompasses a set of moral principles that are believed to be inherent in nature and accessible to human reason. While natural law has been influential in shaping ethical, political and legal thought, it continues to provoke discussion and controversy in contemporary debates. Ultimately, the concept of natural law challenges us to reflect on the foundations of morality and justice, and to consider how we can create a more just and humane society based on universal principles of reason and virtue.

These are questions that we have ignored for far too long. It is that abdication of personal responsibility that has led us to where we are. If the idea of freedom is important to us, it is now incumbent upon each of us, as individuals, to consider these questions, to assume the discomfort and embrace the great responsibility that remaining free requires.

Here’s the Neil Oliver discussion with William Keyte.