Sorry for interrupting regularly scheduled programming. But on Monday, the Magna Carta turned 800 years old, and it is fair to say that without this document, there would be no need to describe political parties, let alone their role in our democracy.
At Runnymede in 1215, commoners and nobles faced King John with a list of demands that included two clauses: "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 way, nor will we proceed with force against him, or send others to do so, except by the lawful judgment of his equals or by the law of the land," and, "to no one will we sell, to no one deny or delay right or justice."
Clearly, these clauses contain the basis of all modern liberty: the right to property, the rule of law, trial by jury, and access to timely justice. Throughout the rest of the Great Charter, there are also the first mentions of concepts and practices that would eventually become the separation of church and state, Parliament, and free association or incorporation.
In our democratic, ahistorical, and anti-traditional age, it is easy to forget that domination, subjugation, and a monopoly on power is the rule, not the exception. Add to this the medieval notion of a king's divine right to rule with absolute power, and suddenly what our forebears did at Runnymede becomes even more remarkable. To put forward such demands upon the King, to argue for a limit to his power was not just risky, it was treasonous.
And while it is true that King John almost immediately repudiated his royal promise and seal on Magna Carta, plunging England into a bloody civil conflict, the precedent set in 1215 did in fact result in charters being granted by kings in return for taxes just ten years later. And in every moment where authority has overstepped its bounds over the centuries, the Magna Carta has been referenced in defence of personal liberty, especially in the U.K. and the United States.
Regarding our own Charter of Rights and Freedoms, one can clearly see that it is a mature branch of the living tree from a seed planted in 1215. From our fundamental freedoms to concerns about language rights at school, our own constitution is similar in content to the laundry list of medieval issues cited in the Magna Carta.
But if we hope to live up to the hopes and hard won freedoms of our forbears, Canadians cannot continue to fear changing our own charter. The uncodified British Constitution has been augmented over the years to ensure more obscure clauses don't suddenly interrupt the entire country. And as I've mentioned in this space before, the American Constitution has already been amended several times in its more than 200 years.
We are in danger of becoming a land that is hamstrung by its own constitution. Even as the trial of Senator Mike Duffy has proven beyond a doubt that the Senate needs reform, it has become clear that the path to reform will require a full amending motion, something that has not occurred once for even a minor change to our Constitution. Add to this the fact that our charter is still not fully ratified, and it becomes clear voters and legislators have a long road ahead of them.
But we must not despair. In the end, our own descendants may not look upon our amendments with the same reverence as they do at what was accomplished at Runnymede. Yet that is right and just, as what is accomplished by argument rather than force of arms is always more gradual in nature.
In the end, we can win more freedom and good government for future Canadians if we will but take courage and move forward. That's the true lesson of the Magna Carta, and we'd be wise to act on it.
