Legal Frameworks that Work
A framework for legal justice that is respected by the State and executed without prejudice is essential for social and economic prosperity. For example, without legal recognition for property rights the economies of the world struggle to thrive. Consider the case of Robert Mugabe’s land seizure policy in Zimbabwe of the 2000s. Property that was legally owned was seized (often violently) and given to the cronies of the ruling Zanu PF party. The fact that highly fertile Zimbabwe was once referred to as the breadbasket of Africa now has to rely on international food aid to ward off starvation proves the point.
It the West it is such a given that there is a concept of personal property and that under God, it is not right to mis-appropriate that, either by theft from an individual, or by the State. A sense of human dignity, given by the divine blueprint found in the Bible, means the rights of all have to be respected, rich or poor, male or female, young or old, irrespective of your beliefs and persuasions. Note that in the Communist states of the 20th century, all property had to be owned by the State for, “the collective good”. Property was seized, open theft by the State ran rampant. Private property was non-existent or severely curtailed. What facilitated this was the belief, that in the absence of answering to a creator God, that the State was the sole authority in the life of the individual and therefore the enlightened elites could self-issue their own permits to seize your goods. Sadly, after the fall of communism in Eastern Europe, legal challenges made by individuals in the 1990s took many years to get compensation for the thefts. Many were not compensated at all.
Whenever there is a breakdown of the respect for property rights it can be guaranteed that an economy will nosedive. Put simply, this is because the individuals or business entities who would normally take a risk to invest in a venture, would instead decide the risk wasn’t worth taking. Why invest your money and work hard to build something that may one day be taken from you?
Such contexts for State thefts are no longer limited to second or third world States. The West is getting dangerously close. In 2022 the Canadian government of Justin Trudeau Bank became increasingly frustrated in its inability to quash the anti-vaccine mandate protests and so used the Canadian Emergencies Act to pave the way for freezing the bank accounts of protesters. This act was unprecedented in the modern history of the civilised West. Similarly, 2023 saw the new word, “de-banking” enter the English Harper Colins dictionary. This new term was created in response to several cases whereby UK banks or financial institutions were unilaterally severing their commercial relationships with customers. Apart from causing significant personal distress, this severely impacted the ability for an organisation to carry out their day-to-day operations. Nigel Farage, the UK politician and broadcaster was de-banked by Coutts Bank (parent company: NatWest Bank) with only a weak and limited explanation offered. Mr Farage persisted in getting to the root of the matter. After much perseverance, and that the matter was now a heated topic in the public eye, it was finally admitted that it was, at least in part, Mr Farage’s views that had led to the closure of the account. This disclosure resulted in the resignation of NatWest boss Dame Alison Rose. We appreciate these examples are not tantamount to State theft, but they are only a step or two away.
The Biblical Mandate for Liberty, Law and Justice in the UK – The Magna Carta
An abstract about the Magna Carta (full name Magna Carta Libertatum – Medieval Latin for “Great Charter of Freedoms”) taken from the website of the UK Parliament:
“Magna Carta was issued in June 1215 and was the first document to put into writing the principle that the king and his government was not above the law. It sought to prevent the king from exploiting his power, and placed limits of royal authority by establishing law as a power in itself”.
In 2015, the UK Houses of Parliament commemorated the 800th anniversary of the creation and signing of the Magna Carta by King John of England. It would be difficult to overestimate the significance of this charter. It is monumental in the history of England and the United Kingdom at large. It has provided the basis for constitutional rights and liberties in civilised societies around the world.
Four of the original copies of the transcript survive today. An online copy in English can be viewed here: Magna Carta, 1215 – The National Archives.
The concepts contained in the Magna Carter had to some extent been implemented by centuries of Anglo-Saxon kings beforehand. Their assumption was that it was their responsibility to provide justice for the people and that they were subservient to God as the supreme lawgiver. Alfred the Great ruled from 871-899 and used the Bible extensively to formulate his Code of Laws. He personally believed he would be accountable to God on Judgement Day as to how he had ruled.
A few examples of how the Clauses of the Magna Carta were taken from Biblical texts:
1. Proportionate Justice Clause 20.
Exodus 21:23-25. Leviticus 24:17-22. Deuteronomy 24:6.
Premise: It is wrong to take away a person’s means of making a living.
Magna Carta Clause 20: People’s means of livelihood not to be removed.
B. Justice in Trade – Standard Weights and Measures. Clause 35.
Premise: Standard weights and measures to be used in trade.
Magna Carta Clause 35: The importance of justice in trade – standard weights and measures to be used throughout the realm.
C. King to appoint competent and fair judges. Clause 45
Isaiah 1:17. Romans 13:1-8. 1 Peter 2:13-14.
Premise: God expects leaders in society to actively seek justice for the vulnerable and exploited. God appoints rulers to administer justice.
Magna Carta Clause 45: King to appoint competent and fair judges.
D. One law for all, whether citizens or aliens. Clause 60.
Premise: One law for all whether citizens or aliens.
Magna Carta Clause 60: Indicates equality of all before the law (a principle further developed in later centuries).
In Conclusion
Contrary to the popular narrative found on the Left that the export of Judeo-Christian ideals have somehow given rise to oppression, the historical fact is that the incorporation of these same ideals has led to societies that are the most respectful of human rights and the rule of law. These societies are also more likely to be prosperous and facilitate innovation of advancements for the greater benefit of mankind. They are also far less likely to end up in outright tyranny.