Report comment

Lord Neuberger is somewhat out of touch with reality of what the Magna Carta really stands for. First and foremost what makes it famous is though Magna Carta provided immunity from arbitrary imprisonment, this great privilege was impaired seriously by abuse of power, by withering away its clauses. Ministers were guilty of this. And again what renders it famous is that the Ministers who act by order of the King, are subject to it as well as others. Under the Statute, no Minister would venture to exercise a sort of oppression so dangerous to himself.

Furthermore, what should be emphasized is the fact that King John broke the terms of this charter by signing the Magna Carta on June 15, 1215. Remember; the penalty for breaking the 1213 agreement was the loss of the Crown (right to the kingdom) to the Pope and his Roman Church. It says so quite plainly. To formally and lawfully take the Crown from the royal monarchs of England by an act of declaration, on August 24, 1215, Pope Innocent III annulled the Magna Carta; later in the year, he placed an Interdict (prohibition) on the entire British Empire. From that time until today, the English monarchy and the entire British Crown belonged to the Pope.

The Constitutional law of a State is the law relating to its Constitution. Where the Constitution is written, it is easy to distinguish the Constitutional law of a State from the rest of its legal system; but where, as in Britain, the Constitution is unwritten, it is largely a matter of convenience what topics one includes in Constitutional law, and there is no strict scientific distinction between that and the rest of the law.

Mr Neuberger you have been placed in your position to safeguard the rights and liberties of the people and not to practice contempt against them, as this breeds anarchy, where I think you ought to already know full well what happened during the last uprising of the people and thus the revolution.