I think the Magna Carta was very much written into common law, and reinforced by Disraeli's subsequent emancipation act, which conferred the same stated common law (Magna Carta) rights on Catholics and other minorities (Jews) as well!
I mean and for heavens sake, we are a modern democracy, (allegedly) rather than a prison colony of convicts, needing to be managed (hammered into shape) by the principle warden/governor?
Customs, convention and precedent are all well and good, but true democracy, is only served by a stated bill of rights, such as the Magna Carta; arguably the very foundation stone of all modern democracies.
If we are a nation whose rule of law and parliamentary traditions are founded lock stock and barrel on Westminster systems, then it has to be all inclusive; rather than patently cherry picked by a conga line of asinine, intransigent, recalcitrant control freaks!?
Who argue, a bill of rights such as the (airily dismissed) Magna Carta, might confer a proxy right to bear arm; (and it does) and or, that a man's home truly is his castle, and as such, enables him to use reasonable force, including firearms, with which to defend it, his family and or retinue!
Surely a pump action shotgun loaded with non lethal bean bags, is not excessive force, for an elderly pensioner, preferred target of choice, by break and enter merchants; who by the way, used to lose their civil rights (lawful protection) when trespassing or poaching!(Theft.) Lawful entrance is only gained via the front door and subsequent invitation to enter!
Perhaps it is time for the government or referendum; (people power) to grant such a bill of irrevocable rights, inclusive of freedom of expression and the right to assemblage?
Least these two remaining immutable common law rights are also surrendered to parliamentary (tinpot potentate) control.
I mean not all that long ago a few of these control freaks? Were arguing for a return to the laws of sedition, to in effect, silence dissent (free speech)!
Democracy may be the worst form of government, but it's better than all the rest!
Rhrosty.

A bill of rights, don't be so silly Rhrosty, such things were never meant for us peasants. It was never envisioned that we could ever have the rich & comfortable life we have today. Hell what is the point of being an elite, if the common herd walking the street have it almost as good as you.

No mate the Magna Carta was only meant for the lords who forced it into being, the free men bit was just a sop to those they needed to fight for them.

Since WW11 the elites have been aghast at the progress to a rich comfortable life, made by the common man. This was never in the scheme of things.

The whole global warming thing is their effort to put us back in our place. Common people with cars, air conditioning, central heating refrigeration & all the rest, it's just not right you know.

Best you join us over on this side, fighting for all we have won, rather than helping take it off us, but a bill of rights, that's asking a bit much.

It's all academic really, the New Feudalism is almost upon us, only the details remain to be settled.
Once the Barons had put their great Idea into writing it was inevitable that more and more people would see it as applying to themselves too, and fighting to achieve that.
Once universal suffrage was achieved we did what humans always do, we relaxed, we forgot, and the barons have been beavering away for decades setting up the process that will put THEM back where they think they belong.
The Two-party system, multiculturalism, PC, dumbing down education, sensationalist media, it's all driven us apart and distracted us as they built their castles and stole our heritage.
Give it about a century and the only difference between the modern world and the Medieval one will be the technology, we're almost there already and the mechanisms to enforce it are in place too.

Although Magna Carta was important in establishing the principle of the rule of law, being legislation it was liable to be superseded by later legislation, with no-one to defend it in the final event but the legislature.

Arguably more important in securing the rule of law were the prerogative writs, which date from about the same time. These were issued by the courts to curb unlawful action by the executive arm of government. The most famous example is habeus corpus. It is to safeguard personal liberty. It orders any person holding any other person against their will to bring that person to court to answer for the lawfulness of his detention. Other examples are the writs of prohibition (a stop order), of mandamus (a "do it" order), and certiorari which quashes, or invalidates, an executive decision.

The reason these are more important in practice is because in practice the risks to liberty come from the executive arm of government because they're the ones with the weapons. The prerogative writs are also more important than Magna Carta because it's very difficult - impossible really - for the legislature to get rid of them or override them, because it's the courts, not the Parliament, who have the final say whether to issue the writ in any given case. They have a chronic habit of reading down any statute that seeks to shut out judicial review of unlawful executive action.

Unlike the Magna Carta, which is rarely if ever litigated, the prerogative writs are very much a part of the courts' ordinary business. For example, it is these ancient mediaeval writs that the refugees are suing on in the High Court.

The resurgence of the prerogative writs in the 20th century, following the rise of the welfare state, in turn gave rise to the modern regimen of adminstrative law, and the so-called 'fourth arm' of government.

We are in an age when the 1% are abusing the 99% in a similar fashion to that of England and its king 800 years ago. This absolute power was eventually controlled by the power of the written word - Magna Carta. It worked then and it can work now. Sir Tim Berners Lee is supporting and promoting my thinking, for which I am truly grateful, but only in respect of the web and we need many other aspects of our present unbalanced world to be considered.
For more information on my work go to my sites at: www.globalmagnacarta.com/net/org
I would be interested in your reaction!

the Magna Carta,

A very relevant article given the present war
with Isis in the middle East. the Sunni Insurgance
is an example of how when the Warlords rise up to take power
the Magna Carta no longer applies.

IN the natural world, the rulers of countries, (Kings and Shieks} have been Warlords,
who road or sailed in at the head of conquering armies. This has been the natural order of things for eons of time.

I believe the rule of Magna Carter will always be in an uneasy
truce, upheld only, if the men with the guns, (in Australia's case
the Australian Army), are in favour of the Magna Carta. Which
at this point they are. But a futuristic conquering army may
not be.

Well given the essential Magna Carta actually survived, as the later emancipation act, we need to ensure it remains as the very foundation stone of democracy it was intended to be; that reduced the absolute powers of a monarch to rule by divine (born to rule) right.
And worthless if we're ever ruled by elected (born to rule) dictators/power hungry petty tyrants/corporate psychos!
This is simply not good enough your Honor!
And allows those with conferred authority to behave as if we had no actual rights/withdraw those we have now on mere caprice or whim?
Yes sure, we can apply to the courts, for an injunction or a measure of protection, and that generally means those with the most real rights, "civil liberties" are those with the most money, and able to afford $600.00 an hour silks, let alone appeal courts and the usually prohibitively expensive high court!
Hell, we have pensioners/domestics/hospitality workers, who don't even earn that much in a week/40 hours!
The only real right the common herd actually posses, is the right to elect our representatives, and we would do far better with far fewer lawyers, who seem to look after their own rather than the common herd?
And of course they and the courts, who allegedly uphold our "civil liberties", don't want that particular gravy train unwound!
Hence the self evident resistance to an irrevocable bill of rights by lawyers, particularly those handed the greatest parliamentary power!?
Civil rights need to be just that and automatically applicable, rather than only actually applied or real, if one can afford to engage a lawyer/legal firm!
Nobody should spend even so much as an hour with their civil liberties suspended, by unlawful incarceration, or be effectively silenced, or unable to assemble.
If you can't assemble/speak your mind, what follows that?
The rejection of unions, protest marches, various religious activities/religions.
They wouldn't do any of that would they? Well?
Trust us, we're politicians, dedicated to serve the electors, and not vested interest or self!
ICAC anyone?
Rhrosty.