Back to Top

Magna Carta Bar Chambers


Traditional Law Center of Barristers


Magna Carta Bar ChambersMagna Carta Bar Chambers (MCBC) is a traditional Law Center, as an international law firm of Barristers of the Independent Legal Profession.  It is established as a non-profit professional institution, as an autonomous official body of the intergovernmental organization (IGO) Ignita Veritas United (IVU), which serves as the host institution providing supporting infrastructure.


The Bar Chambers (MCBC) provides licensed legal services, holding its own institutional legal services licenses as an entity, from multiple governments of the collective Member States of the host IGO institution.


The Bar Chambers (MCBC) is named after the 13th century “Magna Carta”, in dedication to its ancient doctrines of the Rule of Law, and its establishment of timeless basic human rights, fundamental freedoms, and civil liberties. The Magna Carta is one of the key milestones of humanity and core pillars of civilization, which transformed essential protections of historical customary international law into the body of modern conventional international law.


The medieval British term “Chambers”, from the French ‘chambre’ and earlier Latin ‘camera’ meaning a “room”, refers to the formal law offices of Barristers and the Judiciary [1]. Since the Middle Ages, these traditional Chambers of law practice were primarily conducted within and supported by the Inns of Court, while remaining autonomous [2].


In a Chambers as a traditional “law firm”, the Barristers practice law independently, without partnership, while empowered by shared infrastructure and support staff of the Chambers [3]. Historically, Barristers are “the highest class of lawyers”, as the leading experts upholding and advancing the independent Legal Profession in cooperation with the international Judiciary [4].


University Law Center for Ignita Veritas UnitedMagna Carta Bar Chambers (MCBC) operates in connection with Templar Inn of Court, under the Inter-Governmental Bar Council (IGBC), empowered by universal jurisdiction of the Sovereign Court of International Justice (SCIJ) as the IGO High Court for international law and human rights.


Legal work of the Bar Chambers (MCBC) is primarily conducted by accredited International Barristers of the Independent Legal Profession.


The Law Center is supported by the affiliated Ignita Veritas University (IV University), assisted by qualified Law Professors of the University Law Faculty.  It is further supported by participating Judges from the IGO Justice Courts of the Independent Judiciary Profession (who do not preside over any related cases).


In its role as an intergovernmental (IGO) Law Center providing legal support and legal advisory services, strategic and transactional legal work, Magna Carta Bar Chambers (MCBC) is available as an independent contractor to assist national administrations, governmental or intergovernmental organizations, as well as non-profit civil society organizations and other private sector clients.


As a non-profit professional institution, the Bar Chambers (MCBC) uses all net proceeds from legal services to support the humanitarian operations of the host IGO Ignita Veritas United (IVU), especially including its Human Rights Court of the independent Judiciary, through the Public Access to Justice Endowment (PAJE) Fund.




Restoring the Rule of Law and Rights


The “Rule of Law” is essentially the policy of basic human fairness, by public declaration of laws which equally apply to both citizens and government authorities, which traces back to ancient Egypt:


Laws have been written, published, copied and distributed at least since the earliest use of papyrus scrolls ca. 3,035 BC [5], and legal decrees published by standing “Steles” (pronounced ‘stel-las‘) of stone tablets in public places, literally “written in stone”, for all to see [6].


Even the Pharaohs could be deposed, exiled and erased from history if they violated their sacred obligations to fundamental law and rights [7]. This rule of customary law was later applied to depose European kings [8] [9].


The ancient philosophers and scholars such as Aristotle (384-322 BC) wrote the fundamental principle that “law should govern”, and those in power should be “guardians” of law and “servants of the laws” [10].


The doctrines of the Rule of Law were first codified by the Magna Carta, the first charter in history to establish guarantees of specific rights and liberties against arbitrary authority. This became the foundation for Bills of Rights worldwide, the principles of Constitutional law internationally, and the customs of democratic representation by Parliaments worldwide.


The Magna Carta thus accomplished the medieval enactment of the Rule of Law, as a universal system of public law, capable of enforcement on behalf of individual liberties, forming the backbone for all modern civil rights and human rights. [11]


Magna Carta Libertatum, "Magna Carta"

Magna Carta Libertatum, “Magna Carta”

The framework of the Common Law system was developed through legal reforms by King Henry II (1133-1189) [12], and these core principles were enacted in 1215 AD as ‘Magna Carta Libertatum’, meaning the “Great Charter of Liberties”.


The Magna Carta was formally entered into the body of statutory law of England in 1225 AD, as the fundamental principles of jurisprudence of the Common Law, and the cornerstone of national legal systems throughout Europe and most of the world [13].


The essential Magna Carta doctrine as the cornerstone of civilization, and the embodying phrase “Rule of Law”, was popularized in 1885 AD by the British constitutional jurist Professor Albert Venn Dicey (1835-1922), who defined it as:


“No one is above the law, and all are subject to the same law administered in the same courts.” [14]


That 19th century British term “Rule of Law” was quickly enshrined in American and international law practice by Black’s Law Dictionary in 1891 AD, defined as “The predominance, that is absolute, of an ordinary law over every citizen, regardless of that citizen’s power.” [15]


The core concept of “Rule of Law” is that public law – visible and understandable to all – must be the supreme authority, applying equally both to citizens as well as government officials. This is the basic doctrine of jurisprudence that no person, institution, government nor country should ever be “above the law”, but must be subject to publicly disclosed legal codes that can be fairly applied to all. [16]


The most fundamental function of Justice, by an independent Judiciary, must be to apply the public law to the facts of a case, as governed by any private lawful contract, dealing with all facts as supported by available evidence. Therefore, true Justice requires objective application of Law to facts, and requires respect for factual Truth.


Unfortunately, in the modern era, Justice is increasingly politicized, with too many Judges of the State serving as political appointees, tasked with private agendas applied by subjective and superficial conclusions, often disregarding facts and evidence.


In modern world affairs, long-established doctrines of conventional international law among nations are flouted by subjective misinterpretations based upon superficial excuses, backed by government propaganda manipulating mass media to “spin” or hide relevant facts and evidence.


As a result, the world community is increasingly losing the “Rule of Law”, and flagrant violations of civil rights, human rights and international law are putting government agencies (and even whole countries) “above the law”. This dangerous trend presents a direct threat to the “Rule of Law” itself, a threat to international security and peace among nations, and a threat of the collapse of modern civilization as a whole.


It is the mandatory obligation of all Courts of international Justice, Arbitration Courts, governmental Courts of Law, Judges, law firms, and individual lawyers, to uphold the Rule of Law.


This is precisely the reason why Judges are universally protected by a measure of immunity (similar to diplomatic immunity), and lawyers are afforded protection of “privilege” to maintain client confidentiality. This is specifically to empower Judges and lawyers to stand up against corrupt government officials, and fight to ensure that no authorities are allowed to operate “above the law”.


Magna Carta Bar Chambers (MCBC), as a Law Center of the Independent Legal Profession, is dedicated to upholding the Rule of Law for its clients specifically, and thereby for the benefit of civilization generally.  In this way, it can be said that “Justice for one strengthens Justice for all”.


For difficult cases challenged by unusual adversity, the Bar Chambers (MCBC) helps to balance the scales of Justice by leveraging the obligations of governmental authorities under the Rule of Law, to achieve enforcement of the rights of clients.


The effectiveness of this strategy is greatly enhanced by expert support and official backing from the Sovereign Court of International Justice (SCIJ) of supra-governmental universal jurisdiction operated by the Independent Judiciary Profession.




Law Firm Authorities & Mandates of International Law


Magna Carta Bar Chambers (MCBC) holds institutional law firm authorities which are protected by international law, under the 1990 Basic Principles on the Role of Lawyers, including protected client confidentiality (Preamble: ¶9, 11, Articles 16, 21, 22), immunities (Articles 16-17, 20) and investigative powers (Article 21).


These powers and authorities are protected to be free from government influence under the 1948 Declaration of Human Rights (Article 20.2), such that the Bar Chambers (MCBC) effectively represents the Independent Legal Profession.


Services are regulated by the modern Code of Conduct for European Lawyers (2006) of the Council of Bars and Law Societies of Europe (Brussels, Belgium), and also by the traditional Codes of Conduct of the Inter-Governmental Bar Council (IGBC) of the Independent Judiciary Profession.




Source References


[1] Encyclopaedia Britannica, 11th Edition, New York (1911), Volume 5, “Chambers”, at pp.821-822.


[2] London Encyclopaedia, 1st Edition, Thomas Tegg, London (1829), Volume 12, “Inns of Court”, at p.39.


[3] Janine Griffiths-Baker, Serving Two Masters: Conflicts of Interest in the Modern Law Firm, Hart Publishing, Oxford, UK (2002), “The Modern Fiduciary: Conflicts in Other Professions”, pp.51-52.


[4] Encyclopaedia Britannica, 11th Edition, New York (1911), Volume 3, “Barrister”, at p.437.


[5] Toby Wilkinson, Dictionary of Ancient Egypt, Thames & Hudson, London (2005), “Law”, p.135; Ian Shaw & Paul Nicholson (Editors), British Museum Dictionary of Ancient Egypt, The American University in Cairo Press (1996), “Papyrus”, p.219.


[6] Ian Shaw & Paul Nicholson (Editors), British Museum Dictionary of Ancient Egypt, The American University in Cairo Press (1996), “Stele”, p.278.


[7] Donald B. Redford (Editor), The Oxford Encyclopedia of Ancient Egypt, Oxford University Press (2001), Volume 1, “Akhenaten”, p.50: “In effect, Akhenaten’s reign was excised from public record.”


[8] Collier’s New Encyclopedia, Collier & Son, New York (1921), Volume 1, “Abdication”: In customary international law, defined as “relinquishment of… the throne, without a formal resignation” including by denying or disregarding the law which is also the source of one’s authority.


[9] Encyclopaedia Britannica, 11th Edition, New York (1911), Volume 1, “Abdication”; John Miller, James II, 3rd Edition, Yale University Press (2000), p.209; Tim Harris, Revolution: The Great Crisis of the British Monarchy: 1685-1720, Penguin Books (2006), pp.320-328: Involuntary abdication by forfeiture due to gross violations of law incompatible with obligations of the throne.


[10] Aristotle, Politics (350 BC), Book 3, Section 16; Published in: William Ellis, Aristotle’s Politics: A Treatise on Government, George Routledge & Sons, London (1895), p.117: “For order is law; and it is more proper that law should govern than any one of the citizens; Upon the same principle, if it is advantageous to place the supreme power in some particular persons, they should be appointed to be only guardians and the servants of the laws”.


[11] Lord Judge Master of the Temple, The Greatest Knight, in The Inner Temple Yearbook: 2013-2014, Honourable Society of the Inner Temple, p.14.


[12] Paul Brand, Henry II and the Creation of the English Common Law, in Christopher Harper-Bill & Nicholas Vincent, Henry II: New Interpretations, Woodbridge UK, Boydell Press (2007), p.216.


[13] H.D. Hazeltine, “The Influence of Magna Carta on American Constitutional Development in Malden”, in Henry Elliot, Magna Carta Commemoration Essays (1917), p.194.


[14] Thomas Bingham, The Rule of Law, Penguin Global, hardcover edition (2010), pp.3-4.; Thomas Bingham was Lord Chief Justice of the United Kingdom, made Baron of Cornhill and a Knight of the Garter; Citing: Prof. Albert Venn Dicey, An Introduction to the Study of the Law of the Constitution, Cambridge (1885).


[15] Henry Campbell Black, Black’s Law Dictionary (1891), 2nd Edition, West Publishing, St. Paul, Minnesota (1910), “Rule of Law”.


[16] Oxford English Dictionary, Oxford University Press (2013), “Rule of Law”.


You cannot copy content of this page