Marc Horn – Written Evidence (ROL0088)

Defining the Rule of Law

1. What are the components of the rule of law?

The Rule of Law, within the English constitutional tradition, comprises several key components derived historically:

• Fundamental Rights and Liberties: People possess inherent or inherited rights (life, liberty, property, due process) which predate and it follows must bind governance which governance is therefore bound to protect. Magna Carta, the Bill of Rights and Human Rights Act are key recognitions of these. Society must be governed by clear, accessible, predictable, and non-retrospective law protecting individual rights.
• Supremacy of Law: All persons and bodies, including the Monarch and Parliament, are subject to the law. Governance must operate according to established laws (common law, custom, equity) and not rule by arbitrary will which undermines the rule of law. Laws must define and limit the powers of authorities.
• Judicial Independence: An independent judiciary constrained itself by the law exists as the arbiter of the law, interpreting its meaning and ensuring that both those governing and the governed adhere to it. Judicial independence and impartiality are essential.
• Open Justice: is fundamental as justice is being done in everyone’s names, who are equal beneficiaries of the trust placed with the independent judiciary ensures public trust and accountability.
• Limited Government: Governmental power (executive and legislative) in law is a trust, confined by the constitution and the common law. It does not hold absolute power as it derives its authority from the common law.
• Accountability: Ultimately the Monarch and their ministers are accountable for governing according to the law and the constitution. Breach of this trust results in resistance and historically eventual deposition. Transparency and accountability for governance actions are fundamental to the rule of law.
• Legitimacy of Governance: Legitimacy of governance originates from the people in absence of agreement, through a trust where those governing are the trustees of the people’s rights with all people as equal beneficiaries, adjudicated by an independent judiciary itself subject to the same law.

1. Why is the rule of law an important tenet of the UK constitution? The Rule of Law is fundamental because it is the ultimate source of authority to govern, predating and thereby constraining the royal prerogative (the common law right to govern) through the Crown in Parliament, HM Government, and HM Courts and Tribunal Services. The rule of law secures essential rights, liberties, and properties for the people, preventing tyranny and rule by arbitrary government. It provides the foundation for a stable, predictable, and just society where power is exercised according to established principles rather than ruled by mere will. The Rule of Law, constrains governmental authority, historically underpins the UK constitution, and represents a foundational guard against tyranny.

2. Which factors can be used to assess the health of the rule of law? Based on historical analysis, factors would implicitly include:

• Protection afforded to fundamental rights,
• Independence and effectiveness of the judiciary in interpreting law and checking power,
• Adherence to constitutional principles and limitations by those governing (Parliament and HM Government) acting according to law,
• The people’s ability to hold those governing, Parliament, Government, Ministers and their agents accountable and liable.

3. Is useful assistance to be gained from definitions of the rule of law used by international or supranational organisations, or in the legal systems of other countries? No, international definitions provide limited assistance. These are self evident truths where foundational principles can be adequately understood through domestic constitutional history, logic, and reason.

2. How well is the rule of law understood by politicians and the public?

There is significant misunderstanding among politicians, the judiciary, and the public regarding the Rule of Law. Greater emphasis on education and training is necessary to rectify these gaps in understanding.

1. Has the rule of law been confused with the rule of lawyers? Law is totally misunderstood, and hence it follows rule of law is misunderstood. Primary sources confirm the self evident truths that common law, equity and customs are supreme over ‘rule of lawyers’.

Legal services is a significant drain on society with legal services directly or indirectly contributing £74.4 billion to the UK economy in 2022, exporting a net £5.5 billion means a transfer of £58.9 billion within the economy. This is proudly claimed to be a success of 50% growth over a decade[1], highlighting the negative impact of what should be becoming better understood, the rule of law, highlighting the failure of society being governed under the rule of law through clear, accessible and predictable law causing confusion with ‘the rule of lawyers’.

The Operation of the Rule of Law

3. What threatens the effective operation of the rule of law in the UK?

Threats to the Rule of Law arise from attempts by any part of those governing, (historically by prerogative of the Crown from the common law, but potentially also Parliament, Government, Ministers and their agents to by ignoring the foundational (in the absence of agreement) trust between those governing (trustees) and the governed (beneficiaries) by:

• Subversion of fundamental laws and liberties.
• Undermining the independence and authority of the judiciary in interpreting and applying the law.
• Exercising arbitrary power beyond the limits set by law and the constitution.
• Rule by will, rather than govern by established legal rules.

4. What is Parliament’s role in upholding the rule of law? Is it performing this role well, and how could it be improved?

As no one can prove right to impose their will upon another this contradicts the validity of democracy as a source of lawful authority as it breaches the fundamental principle of law, that all are equal under the law and no one is above the law, and hence is a self defeating system as has been proven through the creation of Magna Carta which expanded power from only the monarch and again the turbulence of the 1600 culmination with the Bill of Rights 1688 which further expanded the power sharing, and is only imposition of will by a select group.

Parliament is not performing its role; it does not exist to push political ideologies which are subverting the rule of law and social cohesion. Parliament’s performance is tyrannical, following a belief that it has become ‘God’ merely replacing the tyrannical monarchs in 1688 with a tyrannical parliament.

Parliament's role is primarily legislative to provide redress for the people’s grievances within the Rule of Law framework. It is the supreme body for making, amending, and repealing statute law, but this power operates within, and is subject to, the broader constitutional framework derived from common law, custom, equity, and fundamental/inherited rights. Therefore Parliament is not supreme creator of law above the constitution or the rule of law.

Parliament should also hold ministers accountable and, as representatives of the people, has a duty to amend, strengthen and preserve the law in accordance with fundamental principles of law.

History shows us what happens when we forget the lessons from generations past. Our long history is progression from tyrannical monarchs resulting in Magna Carta whereby monarchs subjected their absolute power to the rule law, albeit limited to the political elites. Then in 1688 those elites expanded, increasing parliament’s powers and now we must progress to the people’s power.

1. How can Parliament improve its legislating to better facilitate the rule of law? Parliament must respect fundamental rights, adhere to established constitutional principles, be clear, and operate within the historical and legal context, rather than attempting radical and abstract change divorced from tradition and lessons learned by past generations failing which we must experience those lessons again of which history is a catalogue of what will happen.

5. What is the Government’s role in upholding the rule of law? Is it performing this role well, and how could it be improved?

The Government (historically the Crown and its ministers) holds the executive power. Its role is to govern according to the peoples respective laws (common law and customs), faithfully execute statutes agreed with Parliament, administer justice (with mercy – the rules of equity) as bound under the Coronation Oath Act 1688 to protect the people's rights, and operate strictly within the legal limits defined by the constitution as bound in the Bill of Right 1688.

Acting beyond legal authority or attempting to subvert the laws constitutes a violation of the Rule of Law and a breach of the governing trust as proven in the Heads of Declaration of the Bill of Rights 1688. The text uses the actions of James II as a primary example of failure in this role.

6. What is the role of the judiciary in upholding the rule of law? Is it performing this role well, and how could it be improved?

The judiciary is since Magna Carta 1215, and currently bound under Magna Cart 1297, the Bill of Rights 1688 and the Constitutional Reform Act 2005 the independent arbiter and guardian of the Rule of Law. Its functions include:

• Interpreting the law (common law, statute, equity).
• Ensuring the government acts within its legal powers.
• Protecting the fundamental rights and liberties of individuals against encroachment by the state specifically in Ashby v White [1704] House of Lords Appeal against Parliamentary encroachment and Entick v Carrington [1765] against executive encroachment.
• Applying principles of natural justice and equity since the Earl of Oxford Case [1615].
• Declaring the law and ensuring its application aligns with fundamental constitutional principles as affirmed by the Senior Courts Ac 1982 through judicial review.

The judiciary is failing in its independence having subjected itself to parliamentary supremacy and forgotten that all are equal under the law and no one is above the law, which includes parliament and the executive, and hence instead of being subject to the rule of law has breached the constitutional principles of the rule of law as well as separation of powers. This is resulting in state overreach driven by politics and not law!

It must return to uphold the rule of law as an independant judiciary.

“Law is order, and good law is good order”  4th C BC, Aristotle.

“Where-ever law ends, tyranny begins” 1689, John Locke

7. Is there a role for the public in upholding the rule of law?

Yes, There is no law known which allows anyone to impose their will upon another without lawful excuse, and that means the only time for lawful interference is when someone is knowingly causing harm without consent.

It follows, at law the relationship can only be a trust those governing are trustees and the governed the beneficiaries. So the people’s role is critical as the beneficiaries of this trust arrangement where those governing, the legislative and executive bodies, as well as the independent Judiciary are entrusted by the people to the Crown and its agents.

This legitimacy in law derives from those entrusted always being accountable and liable to the beneficiaries who thereby preserve their fundamental rights and liberties.

This not only implies a duty to defend the constitution and the Rule of Law, but gives each member of society the tools to hold those governing including their agents to account in the independent Judiciary under the common law.

1. Is there a greater role for education, the media and civic society in promoting the rule of law?

Lord Somers, the chair of creating the Bill of Rights 1688,  recommended his work be kept so that "Children's Children may know the Birth-right, Liberty and Property belonging to an Englishman," suggesting the importance of transmitting constitutional knowledge across generations.

It is a disgrace that this is not part of fundamental public education which should start at entry level.

Mainstream media also does not objectively cover or promote the rule of law which includes large publicly funded outlets.

Thankfully civic society is stepping up to fill this gap much to the disdain of those who are unjustly enriching themselves through perverting the course of justice by attempting to shut down free speech and positive discrimination.

8. How important is the rule of law for the UK’s economy and international influence?

Reiterating from 2.i: Legal services is a significant drain on society with legal services directly or indirectly contributing £74.4 billion to the UK economy in 2022, exporting a net £5.5 billion means a transfer of £58.9 billion within the economy. This is proudly claimed to be a success of 50% growth over a decade[2], highlighting the negative impact of what should be becoming better understood over time, the rule of law, highlighting the failure of society being governed under the rule of law through clear, accessible and predictable law causing confusion with ‘the rule of lawyers’.

The mere notion of attempting influencing others, who should by their freewill adopt what they see is in their best interest, is disgraceful and unlawful as that would be attempting to impose ones will upon another in breach of fundamental law.

The Rule of Law must focus is on liberty, property, justice, and the prevention of tyranny is fundamental to a thriving society, and by returning to the rule of law not only will the UK benefit, but it will be the change others will want to see and thereby ripple around the world as people see how they personally benefit.

9. What threatens the effective operation of the rule of law globally?

Any and every attempt to impose ones will upon another.

1. Which countries do you think are leaders in adherence to the rule of law, and why is this the case? There is no country who is a leader. Some have strengths in certain areas e.g. free speech which is essential for a thriving society of which it appear the US is a leader, with Europe and worst the UK are reverting to tyranny.

2. How effective is the UK as an advocate for the rule of law on the international stage? How could this be improved? The UK's role as an international advocate for the Rule of Law is openly mocked not only internationally, but within as tyrannical. This not only extends to its perceived advocacy by countries, but even private companies are taking action by shutting down access to free speech platforms and even taking legal action in attempts to stop the tyranny now prevalent in the UK attacking fundamental rights and liberties.

“The judiciary and the media have this in common: that, unless they are undermined or silenced, they pose a genuine threat to corrupt and undemocratic regimes and inspire fear in those regimes that wish to retain or consolidate their power. …” 2021, Lord Neuburger, Ms. Amal Clooney, Baroness Helena Kennedy and Mr. Can Yeginsu

22 April 2025