THE Relief Magistrate, Advocate Richard Falle, has come in for more than his fair share of criticism over his promise to jail anyone who refuses to stand for morning prayers in his courtroom.

It is, however, fair to say that letters to this newspaper and other comments about Advocate Falle’s conduct have missed the point of the warning he issued. As he himself has pointed out, he is intent on defending the dignity and authority of the court rather than the primacy of Christianity or, indeed, the established Church.

In short, he will do his duty in accordance with his oath of office and he will not tolerate contempt of court. That the category of contempt in currently in focus concerns prayers is of only incidental significance.

Nevertheless, even if we accept without reservation the principle that our courts have rules and no one can be allowed to flout them in any way, it is legitimate to ask whether even implicit allegiance to a specific religion should
remain a part of legal or civic procedures in this day and age. In spite of the constitutional relationship between the Crown and the Church of England, only the hopelessly romantic or the wilfully blind would continue to describe Britain as a Christian country.

Even here in Jersey, a place less culturally diverse than many parts of the United Kingdom, the courts are frequented by defendants, witnesses, victims, legal professionals and members of the general public of a wide variety of faiths and ethnic backgrounds. A majority of those who would not call themselves Christian will be happy to go along with tradition and will probably view prayers as a display of respect or perhaps a moment of quiet reflection. A minority, on the other hand, will take serious offence at being obliged to participate in what they view as an alien – or in some cases superstitious – rite.

There is little prospect of present court protocol being altered while Anglicanism remains the state religion here and in the UK. That said, there is no reason to believe that courts will, in the fullness of time, be any more resistant to change and reform than any other element of the complex net of institutions and interactions that we label culture.