The annual conference of the International Bar Association (IBA) in Toronto has just ended. I did not participate in person, but attended various committee meetings online.
I have one takeaway, which is not confined to the IBA, but to all international legal meetings where lawyers gather in number: the rule of law is often discussed.
No matter what some lawyers actually do – say, in terms of high fees, aggressive litigation, dubious clients – our sins are swept away by the mention of three magic words: rule of law. We love discussing the rule of law, it makes us feel good, and stops the criticism. We are an essential part of the rule of law.
Nothing original is ever said on the topic at these legal meetings. We can’t even agree what the phrase actually means. The discussions are more like the rule of cliché.
But that is not to say that the rule of law is not vital. We all agree it is one of the centrepieces of a free and democratic society. Rather, it is its ritualistic invocation as a lawyers’ get-out-of-jail-free card that I find irritating.
There is interesting work being undertaken on the rule of law, which does not discuss it in relation to the lawyers’ role, but rather looks at it in the context of other important social concerns. Twinning the rule of law with something else not directly connected to it throws interesting light back on it.
For instance, sharp eyes might have noticed an advert put out by the Bingham Centre for the Rule of Law over the summer for a researcher to undertake a literature review on the rule of law and economic performance. This is in collaboration with the Law Society, and funded by the Law Society.
Read more by Goldsmith
Rule of law combined with economic performance is a currently trending topic, and for good reasons. Western societies are indebted and need to grow economically. The stability provided by the rule of law invites investment from outside. The UK and the EU have both made ‘justice for growth’ a policy priority, because they see the rule of law as differentiating them from some of their economic rivals.
It would be interesting to see whether a sound rule of law does indeed fuel economic growth. China ranks 92 out of 143 countries on the 2025 rule of law index recently published by the World Justice Project (WJP), and Saudi Arabia is not even listed – what exactly is the relationship between performance under rule of law and economic growth? America has slipped a few places over the last few years: will it slip further as concerns for its rule of law increase?
(Interestingly, one of the issues which the Bingham researcher is tasked to look at is ‘Definitions of the rule of law that are used in key papers, and any major differences among these’. As I have already said, no-one can agree what the phrase means. I have pointed out before that Lord Bingham’s own definition differs from that of the WJP by not mentioning ‘corruption’ as a key factor – even though it features high on the WJP list.)
There is a second outside factor through which the rule of law can be usefully examined, and that is climate change. Matt Gingell, founder and chair of the Chancery Lane Project and Law Society Council member, has recently published a paper designed to provoke discussion on just this topic: ‘Safeguarding the rule of law in a warming world: climate change, biodiversity loss and justice in England and Wales’.
He super-imposes tables on the rule of law index put out by the WJP with environmental data (temperature anomaly and biodiversity loss) curated by Our World in Data, to show some correspondence between the two in each case, with the rule of law declining simultaneously with the environmental health of the planet.
He is the first to insist that correlation is not causality. His tables and commentary are designed to stimulate debate, and make us think of the connection between a warming planet and the rule of law, not to state that the tables prove it.
As signs of possible future threats in our jurisdiction, he wonders whether political frustration with climate change rulings may restrict judicial review, whether flooding and other disasters may close courts, and whether protest laws may chill civil society voices. We can each add our own possible future scenarios.
I vainly hope that future discussions on how lawyers’ role is so marvellous in the rule of law will be replaced by alternate discussions about how the rule of law relates to current key issues – here economic growth and climate change, but there are others like AI, and the build-up of defence threats against Europe – so that we can see its importance in a wider context.
Jonathan Goldsmith is Law Society Council member for EU & International, chair of the Law Society’s Policy & Regulatory Affairs Committee and a member of its board. All views expressed are personal and are not made in his capacity as a Law Society Council member, nor on behalf of the Law Society
No comments yet