In 2008 the Inner and Middle Temple celebrate the 400th anniversary of the grant, by Letters Patent from James 1, of all the freehold land around the Temple Church. 1608 therefore marked the start of the modern history of the Bar – at least that part of it which has grown up South of the Strand! To mark this important anniversary the two Inns are holding a year long celebration. The “intellectual backbone” to the celebrations is being provided by a series of five symposia, or public meetings, under the general title: “The Law and Society – which is to be Master?”. The world – renowned Greek charitable organisation, The Alexander Onassis Public Benefit Foundation, has generously sponsored the series. Why are we holding these symposia and what do we hope that they will achieve?

During the 400 years after 1608, lawyers – the judges, barristers and solicitors - have been central in laying the foundation in England and Wales of the rule of law and in creating many legal principles that we now take for granted. Some examples are: the supremacy of the rule of law over the wishes of the Executive (from which, some argue, is derived the modern remedy of “judicial review of administrative action”); the right to free speech (but also its curtailment by the law of defamation); the illegality of slavery in Britain; the general rule of no imprisonment without charge; and the right to trial by jury for serious crimes.

These principles have largely been set out in the decisions of the judges, which make up the common law. The common law’s contribution to legal principle is thus unique, because it is organic. It matures over generations and rarely changes abruptly. So, in a lecture in 2006 Lord Justice Laws described the common law as “an emollient regimen”. But its critics suggest that it sometimes lags behind the rapid changes in modern society and its needs.

However, the law is not an abstract construction of rules. Laws are made in order to regulate relationships in the real world; those between individuals and those between individuals and other groups in society; or society as a whole. The law and society have developed together, although not always harmoniously. Sometimes it appeared that there were clashes between the aspirations of groups in society and the law – eg. the famous cases about strikes in the early part of the 20th century. Sometimes it was clear that the law had not caught up with advances in society and had to adapt. A prime example must be the (reluctant) recognition in Donoghue v Stevenson that the law had to create a new framework of rights and duties in an era of mass production and mass distribution of goods The purpose of this series of symposia is to explore the interaction between the law (in particular the common law) and lawyers and other fields which also fundamentally affect humanity. There are many areas we could have examined. We chose to explore the relationships between the law and each of: science, religion, politics, commerce and international relations.

When we started to think about the topics to be considered, we became conscious of two facts. First, that many of our fundamental ideas on law and about the other topics identified - and many of the arguments which still rage - stem from the ancient Greece. Secondly, that many principles from the seventeenth century have also continued fundamentally to affect us in today’s world. The first aim of these symposia is to remind us of this historical context of the common law heritage.

As an example, take Plato’s view, expressed in The Republic, that the judges should be “the guardians of the laws and the servants of kingly power”. James VI and 1 would have approved of this idea. But his Chief Justice of the King’s Bench, Sir Edward Coke, might be said to have been the true heir of Aristotle’s view that there must be “constitutionalism” or a rule of law which binds all; with the magistrate being the guardian of both justice and equality before the law. Indeed, it has been argued that the Aristotelian idea of the rule of law “…has permeated the culture of British constitutional understanding” . Only last month, the Divisional Court was reminding us that the rule of law must be paramount in a democratic society.

Then take the relationship between law and religion. Plato urged laws to prevent people suggesting “that God, being good, can cause harm or evil to any man” – which implies a control of religious views by law. Aristotle recommended that laws should control education and should inflict chastisement and penalties on those who disobeyed (Nichomachean Ethics Book 10). Aristotle’s writings on religion and science (particularly logic) have remained a basis for modern thinking.

At the time when James VI and 1 granted the land to the two Inns, the common law that emerged from The Temple was fashioning the modern English constitution. Our constitutional principles have remained largely the product of the common law, rather than being confined to statutes or codes. Of course, this development did not stop in the seventeenth century, with its famous constitutional cases which were battles between Coke and his successors and James 1 and Charles 1. Nor did it stop in the eighteenth century with such landmark cases as Entinck v Carrington or Somerset’s case. In 2006 the House of Lords had to pronounce on the legality of the Hunting Act 2004 and the scope of the Parliament Acts 1911 and 1949, with Sir Sydney Kentridge QC leading the argument that the 1949 Act and, consequently, the Hunting Act 2004, were invalid. Their Lordships’ decision rests, ultimately, on the doctrine of the supremacy of Parliament, a doctrine that originated in seventeenth century English cases.

Developments in early seventeenth century England and Europe were important in other areas we wished to explore, as a few examples will illustrate. Sir Francis Bacon, James 1’s Lord Chancellor, remains famous for his Essays, but perhaps more important was his work on the development of scientific method and the use of induction as a means of scientific proof. Hobbes not only fundamentally questioned the basis and function of state power. He also challenged the traditional relationship between Church and State and foreshadowed Enlightenment notions of religious toleration. In Europe, Grotius’ great work on international law, De Jure ac Pacis, was published in 1625 when the Thirty Years War was creating havoc across the centre of the continent. It remains a leading source of international law today. The economic doctrine of the era, mercantilism, gave rise to the English Navigation Acts and Colbert’s centralised control of economic activity in France. The battle between regulation and the later doctrine of free trade and between state control of commercial activities and laissez – faire continues in the 21st century.

This brings us to the second main aim of these symposia: to explore whether or not the current influence of the law (in particular the common law) on these five aspects of society’s activities is for good or ill. The general question might be: does the law (in particular the common law) simply reflect and follow the developments that have taken place in society in the fields of politics, science, religion, commerce and international relations; or has the law enabled, assisted or hindered these developments?

In the first symposium, on Law and Science, the distinguished panel of speakers consisted of Baroness Deech (who had been chair of the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority), Sir Tim Hunt FRS (a Nobel Laureate for medicine), Sir David King FRS, (just retired as the Chief Scientific Advisor to the government), and the well known scientist Lord Winston. The meeting was held in the Royal Society and chaired by its President, Lord Rees. There was a lively debate on whether scientists needed a legal framework and regulation to guide their research, or whether laws frustrated the advancement of science and so, ultimately, hindered science from benefiting humanity. Opinion was equally divided.

In the second symposium, on Law and Religion, there was an equally distinguished panel of speakers, chaired by Anna Ford, who is a Bencher of Middle Temple. We heard contributions from Professor AC Grayling, the philosopher and atheist; Professor Mona Siddiqui, Professor of Islamic Studies at Glasgow University, the Rt Rev Lord Eames, former Archbishop of Armagh, and Lord Justice Rix. There was a keen debate on whether religion should have any part in public life – eg. in politics, or education and what is the proper balance between ensuring religious toleration and maintaining public order.

The next symposium will take place at Westminster School, on Monday 7 July at 6.30 pm. The panel of speakers will be: Lord Bingham, Professor Peter Hennessy, the historian of post – war Britain, Professor Vernon Bogdanor, professor of government at Oxford and Sharmi Chakrabarti, Director of Liberty. They – and the audience - will have much to discuss. Is there a conflict between the law, civil liberties and democracy? Are “unelected judges” and their judgments wrongly taking precedence over the judgment of democratically elected politicians. Have the “rules of the game” changed as Tony Blair stated in August 2005; or have politicians, fearful of the consequences of a terrorist attack on the UK, become irrational in their approach? The Lord Speaker of the House of Lords, Baroness Hayman, will chair this meeting, which promises to be lively and entertaining.

The fourth symposium will be on Law and Commerce and will be held, suitably, in the City, at the Guildhall Museum, on Monday 29 September. The speakers will be Lord Phillips, Lord Chief Justice and a former Commercial Court judge; Lord Browne of Madingley, the former Chief Executive of BP, Sir Andrew Large, chairman of a hedge fund and formerly Deputy Governor of the Bank of England and Jan Paulsson, an internationally renowned commercial arbitrator. This meeting will be chaired by Stephanie Flanders, the well – known economics journalist and television broadcaster. English commercial law developed during the years of Britain’s economic ascendancy in the 19th century. But today traditional common law notions of “freedom of contract” are much circumscribed by statute, European Regulations, international economic treaties and commercial conventions. In this context one inevitably asks: do the lawyers and legislators know enough of how economics and commerce work to make appropriate laws in those spheres – whether on the international scale or for the consumer? Did the law help or hinder in the recent “credit crunch” crisis? Or was it a helpless bystander? Come and debate it in September!

The last symposium will be on law and international relations. It will take place in King’s College, on the Strand, on Monday 8 December 2008. The speakers there will be General Sir Mike Jackson, former chief of the General Staff, Professor Sir Basil Markesenis QC, an international lawyer, Sir Konrad Schiemann, formerly a Lord Justice and now a Judge of the European Court and Sir Malcolm Rifkind QC MP, formerly Foreign Secretary in John Major’s government. The meeting will be chaired by Dame Rosalyn Higgins, who is the President of the International Court at the Hague. Since Grotius and Vattel’s writing in the 17th and 18th centuries, it has been said that there are fundamental principles of international law: that states are equal, independent and entitled to maintain their territorial integrity. But how far do – or should - the principles of international law govern relations between states; or is international law simply an amorphous body of opinions which are ultimately unenforceable? And how are individuals’ rights to be protected in the sphere of international relations. The traditional attitude of the English courts has been that actions by states or international organisations “on the plane of international law” cannot be questioned in domestic courts. To some degree that has been changed by International Conventions, eg. The Torture Convention 1984. But even there, the House of Lords has recently held that this Convention does not side step a foreign state’s right to immunity from suit in the English courts where its agents are accused of being party to torture outside the UK. So, is the sphere of international relations a “lawless world” as Professor Phillipe Sands has described it? Come and argue the point!

We hope to publish the speeches of the main participants in these symposia. They will be a record of some serious thinking on the development of the relationship between law and society. It should provide a fitting record of the 400th anniversary of the start of the modern Bar, which we hope will continue for another 400 years!

Mr Justice Aikens was educated at Norwich School and St John's College Cambridge (now Hon. Fellow).   Barrister (Brick Court  Chambers)1974 - 1999;  QC 1986.  Specialised in commercial,  particularly shipping,  insurance and banking.    Recorder 1993 - 9.   High Court Judge and nominated to Commercial Court 1999.   Presiding Judge of the SE Circuit 2001 - 4.   Judge in charge of the Commercial Court 2005 - 6.   Chairman of the Commercial Court Working Party on Long Trials 2007.  Joint author of book: "Bills of Lading" in 2006