Michael Waller-Bridge Photography
 
HOME

Exhibition at UK Supreme Court

 
'Magna Carta: Reflections'

From October 2nd to December 18th 2015 the UK Supreme Court hosted an exhibition of my photographic portraiture, as part of international commemorations to mark the 800th anniversary of the sealing of the Great Charter.

The exhibition comprised portraits of twelve figures (the number chosen to mirror the size of a Jury) drawn from across the legal profession, who each offer an insight into the enduring relevance of Magna Carta in their...
more »
'Magna Carta: Reflections'

From October 2nd to December 18th 2015 the UK Supreme Court hosted an exhibition of my photographic portraiture, as part of international commemorations to mark the 800th anniversary of the sealing of the Great Charter.

The exhibition comprised portraits of twelve figures (the number chosen to mirror the size of a Jury) drawn from across the legal profession, who each offer an insight into the enduring relevance of Magna Carta in their working lives through a personal statement of around 300 words which was presented alongside each individual portrait.

The exhibition offered a glimpse of how the fundamental principles associated with Magna Carta influence those working in the law, from former Attorney Generals to high street solicitors.

The printed catalogue comprising reproductions of all the 12 portraits and the Sitters’ associated contemplations, together with a Foreword by Lord Neuberger, President of the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom, is available for purchase here:

http://michaelwaller-bridge.photoshelter.com/page2
« less






  • "The Great Charter of 1215 has gone through cycles of veneration and dismissal: dismissal as a carve-up of power between a weak king and his belligerent barons; veneration as the historic source of our freedoms. The truth may be that it is both.<br />
The one thing Magna Carta is not is a source of hard law. If it were, access to justice and trial by jury would be guaranteed to everyone, and trial delays would be unknown.<br />
If, however, instead of peering at the document through the prism of the present, you consider what has happened over the intervening eight centuries, the true role of Magna Carta begins to emerge: the nourishment of a consensus that no power stands outside law, and that there exist fundamental rights which no authority is entitled to abrogate.<br />
To say this is, of course, to say everything and nothing: everything, because in one grand sweep it encapsulates the entirety of the rule of law; nothing, because until you know what power, and what law, and what rights are meant, you are talking in a void.<br />
But it is these questions which give life and purpose to the law. They form part of the never-ending contest between the sweeping claims of power and the autonomy of that most vulnerable of minorities, the minority of one."
    Sir Stephen Sedley
  • "We live in troubled and troubling times. Every region of the world has its vicissitudes. Whether it’s economic turmoil in Europe exacerbated by the stresses caused by the Greek position, political tension in the east fuelled by Russian annexation of Crimea and aggression towards Ukraine, tension across the Middle East as a result of the failure to resolve the Palestinian issue, the rise of ISIL’s sweep across many of the most challenged countries of that region or Boko Haram’s hold in Northern Nigeria, the challenges presented in a globalised world in which violence against women, bribery, corruption, money laundering, people trafficking and drug cartels are rife all wrestle with environmentally difficult consequences of an increasingly industrialised world.<br />
At root of all is a cry for justice, fairness, freedom, a fair balance between the governed and the powers exercised by those who govern: a thirst for the rule of law where every citizen has a right to be heard and the right to fair and honest arbitration of their justiciable claims. The problems of 1215 find their echo 800 years later in our world.<br />
So, it’s not surprising that Magna Carta, fashioned in order to constrain the unfettered pernicious power of an over rampant King, still resonates across the centuries. In Clause 39, it said “no free man, shall be seized or imprisoned or stripped of his rights or possessions or outlawed or exiled or deprived of his standing in any other way, nor will we proceed with force against him or send others to do so, except by the lawful judgement of his equals or by the law of the land” and in Clause 40 “To no one will we sell, no one deny or delay right or justice”. Important in 1215, important today."
    The Rt Hon the Baroness Scotland of Asthal QC
  • "The appearance of ‘rights’ as a set of popular propositions limiting the sovereign is usually traced to Magna Carta in 1215, although that document had nothing to do with the liberty of individual citizens: it was signed by a feudal king who was feuding with thuggish barons, and who was forced to accede to their demands. It had two symbols of a constitutional settlement, however: firstly, it limited the power of the State (in a very elementary way, since the King was the State), and secondly it contained some felicitous phrases which gradually entered the common law and worked their rhetorical magic down the centuries. For example.......the King promised, ‘To no man will we sell, to no man will we deny or delay justice or right.’ This was the forerunner – what might be called the King John version – of Article 6(1) of the European Convention on Human Rights, ‘Everyone is entitled to a fair and public hearing within a reasonable time.’<br />
Magna Carta was reinvented as guarantor of these basic rights by English Parliamentarians as they struggled to share power with a king who insisted on absolute rule. Their Petition of Right, in 1628, was the first legislative attempt to entrench the liberty of the subject.<br />
Extract from “Crimes Against Humanity –The Struggle for Global Justice” Penguin, 2007, p.2-3."
    Geoffrey Robertson QC
  • "Magna Carta was a reassertion of the limits of arbitrary executive power. So it was a seminal moment in the development of the rule of law and due process. The issue and re-issue of Magna Carta during the 13th Century is an inspiring history that reflects a distinctly English revulsion against all forms of executive abuse and insistence on due process of law. There are those who say that Magna Carta only conferred rights on powerful barons. This is not the whole story. The Charter laid down a real basis for the limitation of all forms of arbitrary power and did enshrine the principle of the supremacy of the law. Once asserted, that principle could not be limited to a privileged few.<br />
My own favourite part is the prohibition on excessive ‘amercements’, or disproportionate and extortionate fines in Clause 20. Clause 20 is perhaps the first clear statement of the proportionality principle in English Law. It may seem obvious. But it was important to state the principle of a need for proportionality in the award of fines and other punishments. It has been shown that this principle, constantly reasserted in later centuries, was the real rationale of the prohibition on cruel and unusual punishments in the 1689 Bill of Rights. As advocates in the fields of criminal and administrative law we have constant recourse to this principle and Magna Carta remains a source of inspiration in this.<br />
More recently in the Chagos Islanders case we invoked the principle enshrined in Clause 39 that no one should be sent into exile save by due process of law. So it is a living instrument."
    'Edward Fitzgerald CBE QC'
  • "A dispute 800 years ago between a deeply unpleasant king and a group of noblemen concerned to maintain their privileges has provided the focus for a celebration of the rule of law. History, on this occasion, is not bunk (as Henry Ford complained), but serendipity.<br />
Most of the provisions of Magna Carta are rightly forgotten. Many of them were of limited significance even in 1215. Some of them are offensive to modern eyes. But the document did contain the germ of the concept that those who exercise power must do so according to law. That principle forms the basis of so much of the work of today’s Supreme Court when deciding judicial review applications and claims under the Human Rights Act 1998.<br />
In Shakespeare’s “King John” - which makes no mention of Magna Carta - Philip Falconbridge, the illegitimate son of Richard I, laments the “Mad world, mad kings, mad composition”.<br />
The rule of law, dating back to events at Runnymede in 1215 and as applied in this building, helps to control the madness."
    Lord Pannick QC
  • "For me Magna Carta is an important part of the UK’s creation myth. Without knowing any of the detail of its provisions or its history, Magna Carta establishes the principle that Kings (or Prime Ministers) are subject to man-made law and to the judges who uphold it. The fact that the Charter itself may have been a cynical pact produced as a piece of short term expediency between a very small elite group of barons and a weakened king, and was probably entered into by King John under duress, is really neither here nor there. It forms part of our belief in the core values of the UK and the values that the courts will always act to protect. In Lord Bingham’s book, the Rule of Law, he starts his historical analysis with Magna Carta as the foundation stone of the rule of law. That is why Magna Carta can be such a potent weapon in court against the Government.<br />
No judge likes to think that he or she might be offending against Magna Carta, however hazily counsel, or even sometimes the judge, may understand what the terms of the Charter actually were. It stands in the minds of all lawyers as being the core text for the “rule of law”, which can only, in the words of ‘1066 and All That’, be “A Good Thing”."
    Nathalie Lieven QC
  • "A quarrel between the barons and the King 800 years ago might seem to have little relevance to us today. However, one of the greatest ideas which this country has contributed to the world, the idea of the rule of law, can be traced back to Magna Carta. Even the Crown is subject to the law of the land. Today judges sitting in the Administrative Court, hearing applications for judicial review, give practical effect to the rule of law every day.<br />
Although it may seem surprising it is also possible to trace the lineage of the concept of human rights back to Magna Carta. This is why, when the Universal Declaration of Human Rights was adopted by the United Nations in 1948, Eleanor Roosevelt, who chaired the drafting committee, described it as an “international Magna Carta” for all of humanity. However, we have come a long way since 1215. At that time many people were denied basic rights; some were even serfs. In contrast, the Universal Declaration proclaims, in Article 1, that “all human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights."
    'The Hon Mr Justice Singh'
  • "I experienced life on the ‘front line’ in cases concerning the welfare of children as a Circuit Judge sitting in the Courts of East Anglia and London (1996-2015). Until recently I would have assumed that Magna Carta had very little contemporary significance to my judicial work - I no longer consider that true.<br />
Clause 40 states, “To  no-one will we......deny or delay right or justice.”<br />
Recent restrictions on Public Funding, together with the rise in Court Fees, have resulted in a substantial increase of parents and grandparents having to represent themselves in Children’s cases. Parents acting in person are, understandably, unlikely to have knowledge of the procedure and the law. The factual and emotional background is often complex and parents are not always their own best advocates.<br />
In such cases as these, a Judge will endeavour to ensure that all parties understand the issues and the law, and will do all that can fairly and properly be done to see that a litigant in person is not disadvantaged. In my experience, the consequence is that the Court’s delicate and complex task of determining how the child’s welfare is best served is made more difficult.<br />
This cannot be to the benefit of the child, the parents, or, indeed, justice.<br />
Ironically, in my opinion due to the lack of legal representation, in the year we celebrate the 800th anniversary, it is questionable whether we are truly invoking the spirit of Magna Carta and justice for all."
    His Hon Philip Curl
  • "As a woman from a working class and ethnically diverse background, I won the golden ticket by being born in twentieth century England. The concept of rights for all has been fundamental in enabling me to study, change careers, qualify as a solicitor and establish my own firm. Millions of women globally aren’t so lucky. So every time an opportunity arises to promote my profession and especially the women in it, I am grateful.<br />
Magna Carta did not set out to create our modern legal profession or enable the best legal aid system in the world (present cuts permitting). However, it was the opening salvo towards the more equal society that we are lucky enough to be a part of today. It changed the balance of power and the legal emphasis in order to reflect the virtues commonly ascribed to the British legal system – tolerance, fairness but most importantly equality before the law.<br />
As with so many great ideas, it was a simple one that had unforeseen but positive consequences for subsequent generations and an inspiration for emerging democracies."
    Sarah Austin
  • "I find it difficult to put myself in the position of one of the original supporters of the Magna Carta, but it is the place where we have to start if we are to understand its importance. The Barons sought to protect their interests from a tyrannical king, but in doing so they also had to accept the principle that they would be similarly bound in their dealings with those who were tied to them by obligations of loyalty and service. This principle enabled it to endure. It was why it was reissued to end the civil war on King John’s death. It was why over the century after it was first issued that it became capable of being invoked, not just by powerful men but by peasants in dispute with their Lord. It entered our national consciousness as a set of principles of justice and on the limits of the exercise of power, which if at times ignored were not forgotten and could be and were revived. A great deal of that revival may have been based on a mythical interpretation of the Charter’s origins but not of its significance.<br />
Today we are the beneficiaries of this tradition in respect of both our rights and liberties and of parliamentary authority as a check on government. We have a lot to celebrate."
    The Rt Hon Dominic Grieve QC MP
  • "By granting inviolable rights to his subjects and corresponding restrictions to his own power, King John reluctantly created a legacy of justice which has stood the test of time. The Human Rights Act is an updated expression of these principles. We should not be surprised that it too has met with hostility.<br />
Although everyone has human rights, it is usually only the poor and marginalised who struggle to assert them. Sometimes we do not want to hear these voices as they contain inconvenient truths about the unequal society we live in.<br />
Yet, Clause 40 of Magna Carta dictates: “To no one will we sell, to no one deny or delay right or justice”. This blueprint for a fair society was a distant hope in medieval England and we have still not achieved it to this day.<br />
Legal aid, which is the tool by which the poor can access justice, is, like the Human Rights Act, under serious threat. In 2013, the Government introduced proposals designed to shut out foreigners and prisoners from much of legal aid funding. It is worth noting that when Lord Justice Moses held that the denial of legal aid to foreigners could not be justified because all who are equally subject to the penalty of law must also be equally entitled to its protection, he had 800 years of principle behind him.<br />
Prisoners, and sometimes foreigners, may be unpopular. But we deny no one. Least of all, I would say, the unpopular."
    Jocelyn Cockburn
  • "Despite being taught history by David Starkey at the LSE in the late 1970s, I began life at the Bar without any sense that references to Magna Carta would advance my cause in the cases I was arguing – not even in the field of prison law in which I chose to specialise.  Indeed, I was convinced that most, if not all, Judges would conclude my submissions must be hopeless if I needed help in the form of the Great Charter. No mention of Magna Carta was made in the Index to my textbook on Prison Law first published in 1993 and neither of the two practitioner works on criminal law (Archbold and Blackstone’s Criminal Practice) currently cite it either. In the Chagos Islands case of Bancoult, while describing as “florid” the argument that the Ordinance purporting to authorize the exile of the Ilois people to Mauritius was an affront to the rights and liberties enshrined in Clause 39 of Magna Carta, Lord Justice Laws endorsed the view of Pollock and Maitland in their 1923 work “The History of English Law” that it is - “a sacred text, the nearest approach to an irrepealable ‘fundamental statute’ that England has ever had. In age after age a confirmation of it will be demanded and granted as a remedy for those oppressions from which the realm is suffering and this when some of its clauses, at least in their original meaning, have become hopelessly antiquated. For in brief it means this, that the King is and shall be below the law.”<br />
It is, I think, hard to improve on this assessment of its enduring relevance and significance as a proclamation of the rule of law."
    Tim Owen QC
Biography Projects Contact
 
All images ����¯�¿�½������© Michael Waller-Bridge. All Rights Reserved