History Of Magna Carta Essay

“Magna Carta has neither legal nor symbolic significance in Australia today.” Discuss.

Magna Carta

The Magna Carta was an important legal document in feudal England, where despotism oppressed the masses. Magna Carta, meaning ‘The Great Charter’, is one of the most renowned documents in the world, it was originally sealed by King John of England as an expedient response to political pressure from revolting barons at Runnymede in 1215. The charter outlined terms of a de facto constitutional settlement between the crown, the most influential families and the entire community. The original charter, contains 63 articles, which are mostly concerned with taxation, criminal justice, public administration and royal abuses of feudal customs. The Magna

Carta established the principle that all men, including the monarchy, was subject to the law, thus preventing arbitrary abuse of power. The Magna Carta remains the cornerstone of the British Constitution and has had an impression on Australia’s constitutional heritage. However, in 21st Century Australia, the Magna Carta remains a largely futile text of archaic legislation, which has outdated symbolism.
History of the Magna Carta
The original charter of 1215 was only technically valid for a few weeks, King John renounced the document, with the annulment of his oath by his ally, Pope Innocent III, provided that the charter was sealed under duress.

After King John’s death, the document was reissued by the guardians of his nine-year-old son, Henry III in 1216. The Magna Carta was modified on various occasions including the years 1217 to extract articles and in 1225 to address taxation to pay for wars in both France and England. Within a few decades, it became “virtually inconceivable that Henry III or his successors could in any way seek to annul Magna Carta. ” Although Magna Carta’s roots only gave rights to ‘free men,’ which excluded the villein majority, these principles supposedly led to the British Bill of Rights in 1689 which gave rights to all men. These rights granted freedom from royal taxation, the ability to petition the monarch, the power to elect members of parliament and freedom of speech. These liberties which were excessively perceived to originate in Magna Carta, were the influential ethical basis in the forming of the United States Constitution in 1797 and were motivators in the French Revolution. Australia as part of the Commonwealth based its constitution on British legislature in 1900 which was attributed to being informed by the Magna Carta’s fundamental

concepts.
Magna Carta’s legal irrelevance
The Magna Carta has negligible practical use and its presence as a legal inheritance is not apparent in present issues, making it supposedly obsolete. Jurisdictions with Imperial Acts like Victoria and Queensland enact chapter 29 of the Magna Carta. While Western Australia, South Australia, the Northern Territory and Tasmania theoretically have most of the Magna Carta in force. Even though the charter is hypothetically in force as part of inherited Imperial statute law, it needs to be suitable for local conditions. Most of the Magna Carta of 1297 is specific to the times and has been repealed by the British in the 19th Century.

Sir Edward Coke's asserts that Magna Carta “was for the most part declaratory of the principal grounds of the fundamental laws of England,” is that the doctrines in Magna Carta are common law principles. It follows from this that even on the basis that Magna Carta is an expression of common law, the High Court of Australia, for example, was free in Jago v District Court of New South Wales to declare that in Australia there is no common law right to a speedy trial. Furthermore, in Australia common law is developed in courts and can be altered by court hierarchy. In this case, the law in the charter (other than chapter 29) has been repealed since. It also follows that if Magna Carta is part of the common law of Australia it is uniform throughout the country. However, this argument for the Magna Carta as common law clashes with statutory material such as the Imperial Acts which operates on the basis that chapter 29 of Magna Carta 1297 is a statute for local purposes. In Australian courts the Magna Carta is unlikely to be considered part of common law, ignoring local Imperial Acts legislation. It follows that the Magna Carta at best is persuasive precedent and has no real jurisdiction. While the Magna Carta has been irrationally esteemed by judges, it has almost never been applied in an Australian case.

There is a misconception which means that many litigants have argued that local legislature conflicts with the Magna Carta. This argument relies on the proposition that the Magna Carta is an entrenched constitutional provision, to which all acts are obligated to adhere. Litigants exaggeratedly claimed that the Magna Carta prohibits magistrates or judges from making cost orders, this has been compared to selling justice which contradicts with chapter 29 of the Magna Carta. Another absurd argument is that the Commonwealth of Australia could not pass a bill to create Australian banknotes as the legislation was contrary to the Magna Carta which only allows for gold and silver coins. In Queensland, a litigant asserted that he was not in contempt of court, even though he accused the judge of partiality and bias, as the finding was not preceded by a hearing as mandated by the Magna Carta. The inaccurate theory surrounding the charter’s supremacy produced the argument that the Commonwealth electoral legislation was illegal and in violation of Magna Carta, as it requires candidates for Parliament to lodge a deposit or fee with the electoral commission. It was further argued that rival candidates who paid deposits in bank notes were invalid applicants. Moreover, the courts rejected the inconceivable notion that the entire system of income taxation authorised by the Income Tax Assessment Act 1936 is invalid, as it involves the seizure of property contrary to Magna Carta. The Magna Carta cannot limit Australian parliamentary sovereignty and if considered law applies to the degree that local legislature has not changed it, if an enactment is inconsistent the charter is no longer law to the extent of the inconsistency. These legal principles limit Magna Carta, making the charter essentially insignificant.
Magna Carta’s symbolic insignificance
The Magna Carta’s widespread sentiment is drawn from a lack of understanding, the extravagant use of the charter neglects its archaic and specifically British medieval heritage. In legal and political history, there is a dispute as to whether Magna Carta represents the principled protection of human liberty or rather is a pragmatic declaration of baronial rights. The charter as a medieval text, if read narrowly within the grievances of a specific class displeased with King John, is simply an interesting artefact stipulating privileges endowed to the elite and are in the interests of aristocracy. This contextualised analysis of the Magna Carta reveals that many of its historical factors indicate “it was the product of a particular historical situation. ” The concept of ‘liberties’ embedded within the Charter, relies on feudal customs, meaning that a superior can remove rights for just cause. Therefore, universal inherent or civic rights cannot be attributed to the Magna Carta without historical plausibility. Rather, the charter laid out the terms for concession to a select group of nobles to use their feudal rights as they saw fit. Furthermore, the charter is specifically designed for English circumstance. Of the four articles that have not been repealed, two are not relevant to Australia. Chapter 1 is devoted to keeping the English church free, which has no implication in Australia where there is no established church. While chapter 9 is dedicated to upholding the liberties of London, which Australia cannot legally enforce and is largely irrelevant. Furthermore, during wartime, politicians have ignored the 'empty talk about the Habeas Corpus, or the Bill of Rights, or Magna Charta,' choosing instead to protect the country above legislature and symbolic rights. Therefore Magna Carta is an artefact which has been indiscriminately applied symbolically to rights issues in Australia, without considering its historic roots or its application.