SOVEREIGN AS ‘FOUNT OF JUSTICE’

In the earliest times, the Sovereign was a key figure in the enforcement of law and the establishment of a system of justice.

Nowadays the Sovereign retains a symbolic role as the figure in whose name justice is carried out, and law and order are maintained, but is not involved in the actual administration of justice.

The independence of the legal system, and the Sovereign’s role as the source of justice, have developed over many centuries.

In late Anglo-Saxon times, the concept of the Sovereign as the ‘Fount of Justice’ grew in importance as it helped to ensure that a single system of justice prevailed over competing local, civil and ecclesiastical jurisdictions.

Ethelbert’s reign (560-616) saw the first law code written in the vernacular. Kings such as Alfred the Great (reigned 871-99) extended the law codes by codifying community custom, administrative regulations and ancient law.

Successive kings preserved and adapted the body of English laws which had been accepted by the community and which past kings had published, and case law supplemented these law codes.

This accumulated legislative power placed responsibilities on the king as a dispenser of justice to ensure order and punish crime.

From William the Conqueror (reigned 1066-87) onwards, Royal justice was more effectively enforced by the king’s appointment of local sheriffs, travelling justices and other officials to administer justice in the Sovereign’s name throughout the kingdom.

A chronicler of 1179 wrote of Henry II (reigned 1154-89): ‘he appointed wise men from his kingdom and later sent them through the regions of the kingdom assigned to them to execute justice among the people … This he did in order that the coming of public officials of authority throughout the shires might strike terror into the hearts of wrongdoers.’

The Royal courts were therefore at the centre of the administration of justice in both civil and criminal cases, and Sovereigns themselves took an active part in their own courts, with the king sometimes presiding over the proceedings.

By the fifteenth century, the central courts had settled at Westminster, and the Courts of Justice remained housed at Westminster Hall (built in 1097 and renovated in 1394) until 1882.

However, there were limits to Royal enforcement of justice or ‘the king’s peace’. These included the geographical distance of the more remote shires (particularly on the troubled borders of the Welsh Marches and Scotland).

There was independent jurisdiction in ‘palatine counties’, where Royal powers were granted in franchise to an individual. There were also ecclesiastical jurisdictions and, above all, the Sovereign’s reliance on local barons and gentry to uphold the law in the regions, liable to break down in times of civil war.
 
As Parliament’s legislative role grew and day-to-day power came to be exercised by Ministers in Cabinet, so the Sovereign’s role in actually administering justice declined.

The Bill of Rights (1689) (in Scotland, the Claim of Right) confirmed the basic constitutional principle that the Sovereign no longer had any right to administer justice.

The Sovereign’s responsibilities regarding the judiciary also waned. Under the Act of Settlement (1701), judges were to hold office during good behaviour rather than by the Sovereign’s will.

Judges could be removed by the Sovereign on the advice of Ministers, either following an address presented by both Houses of Parliament or without an address in cases of official misconduct or conviction of a serious offence.

The Act therefore established the judicial independence which exists today.