The Council of Ministers (Amendment) Bill 2019 puts onto a formal legal framework the principles of the rule of law and the independence of the judiciary.

The Law Society supports the Bill.

But what is the rule of law?

I will not go into the academic debate about this as I find it too ratified and of limited practical use. No doubt you would too.

The core of the principle though is that all persons and authorities within the state should be bound by and are entitled to the benefit of laws which firstly are publicly made and secondly publicly administered in the courts.

This ensures the principles of openness and fairness with everybody, including the State, being equal before the law.

The rule of law captures, in my opinion, the fundamental truth that ’whenever law ends, tyranny begins’.

It does not mean however that we should put the law on some kind of a pedestal, let alone the lawyers. Many people share the ambition expressed by one of the rebels in Shakespeare’s Henry VI Part II: ’The first thing we do, let’s kill all the lawyers.’

I have a fridge magnet at home saying this!

Belief in the rule of law means that we accept that we would very much rather live in a country which complies, or at least tries to comply with the principle, than one which does not.

We all know the hallmarks of regimes which flout the rule of law as they are all too familiar - the midnights knock on the door - the sudden disappearance - the show trial - the gulag.

The list is endless.

Judges are frequently branded as, one minute out of touch or too harsh and then the next as wishy-washy liberals unwilling to punish anyone properly.

However, is it not better to put up with our independent judges and lawyers rather than the alternative? Perhaps as a lawyer I would be expected to say this.

However, what choice is there - would you prefer the State controlled judge and a hamstrung lawyer to protect your rights?

I recently met with a group of Commonwealth lawyers.

Part of the Law Society’s reaction to Brexit by looking to the world at large on the island’s behalf.

I was surprised by the fact that there are common themes in every jurisdiction.

There is a shortage of public funds for the representation of people who cannot afford it themselves. The court systems are subject to budget economies.

There is an advance of State control of the legal professions.

hese may be thought of as prudent economy, proper regulation and appropriate political oversight. But where does this stop and the end of the proper treatment and representation of individuals and others in society start?

Lawyers are expected to be fearless in the representation of their clients.

This is what we are trained to do. Judges are expected to apply the law without prejudice or favour.

This is what they are trained to do.

When does the rule of law start to be eroded? We all know when it ends. T

he only way to protect it is to have it central to every consideration in society and guard it scrupulously. Frequently the end starts with people not thinking about it or thinking of other matters as priorities. Then too late it has gone.

Thankfully, we live in a country where we still have the rule of law.

Long may it be so.

But I learnt when talking to colleagues from other jurisdictions that we all have to be ever watchful.

It is not something that can be taken for granted anywhere. Everyone, not just lawyers, should be aware of its importance as it affects everyone, everywhere.

All I ask is for you to think twice before you look to kill all the lawyers. Hate us or love us, at least we’re here, working within and for the rule of law. That isn’t the case in every country in the world.