View source for Bill of Rights 1689

{{Short description|English civil rights legislation}}
{{Use dmy dates|date=January 2021}}
{{Use British English|date=January 2021}}
{{Infobox UK legislation
| short_title           = The Bill of Rights{{refn|name=shorttitle|The act is cited as "The Bill of Rights" in the United Kingdom, without a year, as authorised by section 1 of, and the first schedule to, the [[Short Titles Act 1896]]. Owing to the repeal of those provisions, it is now authorised by section 19(2) of the [[Interpretation Act 1978]]. In the Republic of Ireland, it is cited as "The Bill of Rights 1688", as authorised by section 1 of, and the first schedule to, the Short Titles Act 1896 (as amended by [http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/2007/en/act/pub/0028/sec0005.html#sec5 section&nbsp;5(a)] of the [[Statute Law Revision Act 2007]]). The short title of this Act was previously "The Bill of Rights".<ref name="legisgovnX1">{{cite web|url=http://www.legislation.gov.uk/aep/WillandMarSess2/1/2#commentary-c2144673|title=Bill of Rights [1688]|publisher=legislation.gov.uk|at=Editorial Information, note X1|access-date=7 March 2023}}</ref>|group="nb"}}
| type                  = Act
| parliament            = Parliament of England
| long_title            = An Act Declaring the Rights and Liberties of the Subject and Settling the Succession of the Crown.
| year                  = 1689
| citation              = [[1 Will. & Mar. Sess. 2]]. c. 2
| introduced_commons    = 
| introduced_lords      = 
| territorial_extent    = [[England and Wales]]
| royal_assent          = 16 December 1689
| commencement          = 13 February 1689{{refn|group=nb|name=year|The Bill of Rights was passed in December 1689, so most sources refer to it by the year 1689.<ref>{{cite web |title=Bill of Rights 1689 |url=https://www.parliament.uk/about/living-heritage/evolutionofparliament/parliamentaryauthority/revolution/collections1/collections-glorious-revolution/billofrights/ |website=UK Parliament |language=en |quote=The Bill of Rights 1689 is an iron gall ink manuscript on parchment.}}</ref> However, all Acts of Parliament [[Acts of Parliament (Commencement) Act 1793|prior to 1793]] were [[ex post facto law]]s that came into effect on the first day of the session. The [[Convention Parliament (1689)]] met on 22 January and became a formal Parliament on 13 February. However, the year 1689 did not begin until [[Lady Day|25 March 1689]] ([[Old Style and New Style dates|Old Style]]). Therefore, the Bill of Rights is officially dated 1688.<ref name="legisgovnX1">{{cite web|url=http://www.legislation.gov.uk/aep/WillandMarSess2/1/2#commentary-c2144673|title=Bill of Rights [1688]|publisher=legislation.gov.uk|at=Editorial Information, note X1|access-date=7 March 2023}}</ref>}}
| repeal_date           = 
| amends                = 
| replaces              = 
| amendments            = {{ubli|[[Crown and Parliament Recognition Act 1689]]|[[Juries Act 1825]]|[[Statute Law Revision Act 1867]]|[[Statute Law Revision Act 1888]]|[[Short Titles Act 1896]]|[[Accession Declaration Act 1910]]|[[Statute Law Revision Act 1948]]|[[Statute Law Revision Act 1950]]|[[Succession to the Crown Act 2013]]}}
| repealing_legislation = 
| related_legislation   = [[Absence of King William Act 1689]]
| status                = Amended
| original_text         = https://www.british-history.ac.uk/statutes-realm/vol6/pp142-145
| revised_text          = https://www.legislation.gov.uk/aep/WillandMarSess2/1/2
| use_new_UK-LEG        = yes
| UK-LEG_title          = Bill of Rights
}}
{{Infobox document
|document_name = The Bill of Rights
|image = English Bill of Rights of 1689.jpg
|image_caption =
|date_created = 1689
|date_ratified =
|location_of_document = [[Parliamentary Archives]]
|writer = [[Parliament of England]]
|signers =
|purpose = Assert the rights of Parliament and the individual, and ensure a Protestant political supremacy
|wikisource=Bill of Rights 1689
}}

The '''Bill of Rights 1689''' ([[1 Will. & Mar. Sess. 2]]. c. 2) (sometimes known as the '''Bill of Rights 1688''')<ref name="legisgovnX1" /> is an [[Act of Parliament (United Kingdom)|act]] of the [[Parliament of England]] that set out certain basic [[civil rights]] and changed the succession to the [[Monarchy of England|English Crown]]. It remains a crucial [[statute]] in [[UK constitutional law|English constitutional law]]. 

Largely based on the ideas of political theorist [[John Locke]],{{sfn|Schwoerer|1990|pp=531–548}} the Bill sets out a constitutional requirement for the Crown to seek the consent of the people as represented in [[Parliament of England|Parliament]].<ref name="British Library"/>{{sfn|Adams|Meuwese|Hirsch Ballin|2017|p=97}} As well as setting limits on the powers of the [[monarch]], it established the rights of Parliament, including regular parliaments, free elections, and [[parliamentary privilege]].<ref name="ParliamentUK">{{cite news |title=Bill of Rights 1689 |url=https://www.parliament.uk/about/living-heritage/evolutionofparliament/parliamentaryauthority/revolution/collections1/collections-glorious-revolution/billofrights/ |access-date=30 April 2019 |agency=Parliament UK}}</ref> It also listed individual rights, including the prohibition of [[cruel and unusual punishment]] and the right not to pay taxes levied without the approval of Parliament. Finally, it described and condemned several misdeeds of [[James II of England|James II]] of England.<ref name="British Library">{{cite web |title=Britain's unwritten constitution |url=http://www.bl.uk/magna-carta/articles/britains-unwritten-constitution |publisher=British Library |access-date=27 November 2015 |quote=The key landmark is the Bill of Rights (1689), which established the supremacy of Parliament over the Crown. ... The Bill of Rights (1689) then settled the primacy of Parliament over the monarch’s prerogatives, providing for the regular meeting of Parliament, free elections to the Commons, free speech in parliamentary debates, and some basic human rights, most famously freedom from ‘cruel or unusual punishment’. |archive-date=12 March 2015 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150312163142/http://www.bl.uk/magna-carta/articles/britains-unwritten-constitution |url-status=dead }}</ref> The Bill of Rights received [[royal assent]] on 16 December 1689. It is a restatement in statutory form of the [[Declaration of Right, 1689|Declaration of Right]] presented by the [[Convention Parliament (1689)|Convention Parliament]] to [[William III of England |William III]] and [[Mary II of England|Mary II]] in February 1689, inviting them to become joint sovereigns of [[England]], displacing [[James II of England|James II]], who was stated to have abdicated and left the throne vacant. 

In the [[United Kingdom]], the Bill is considered a basic document of the uncodified [[Constitution of the United Kingdom|British constitution]], along with [[Magna Carta]], the [[Petition of Right]], the [[Habeas Corpus Act 1679]] and the [[Parliament Acts 1911 and 1949]]. A separate but similar document, the [[Claim of Right Act 1689]], applies in [[Scotland]]. The Bill was one of the models used to draft the [[United States Bill of Rights]], the [[United Nations Declaration of Human Rights]] and the [[European Convention on Human Rights]].<ref name="ParliamentUK"/> Along with the [[Act of Settlement 1701]], it remains in effect within all [[Commonwealth realm]]s, as amended by the [[Perth Agreement]].

==Background==
During the 17th&nbsp;century, there was [[Magna Carta#17th–18th centuries|renewed interest in Magna Carta]].<ref>{{cite web |url=https://www.bl.uk/magna-carta/videos/from-legal-document-to-public-myth-magna-carta-in-the-17th-century |title=From legal document to public myth: Magna Carta in the 17th&nbsp;century |website=The British Library |access-date=2017-10-16 |postscript=none |archive-date=27 March 2015 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150327042835/https://www.bl.uk/magna-carta/videos/from-legal-document-to-public-myth-magna-carta-in-the-17th-century |url-status=dead }}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.sal.org.uk/events/2015/06/magna-carta-magna-carta-in-the-17th-century/|title=Magna Carta: Magna Carta in the 17th&nbsp;century|website=The Society of Antiquaries of London|access-date=2017-10-16|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180925053248/https://www.bl.uk/magna-carta/videos/from-legal-document-to-public-myth-magna-carta-in-the-17th-century|archive-date=2018-09-25|url-status=dead}}</ref> The [[Parliament of England]] passed the [[Petition of Right]] in 1628 which established certain liberties for subjects. The [[English Civil War]] (1642–1651) was fought between the King and an oligarchic but elected Parliament,<ref>{{cite web |title=Origins and growth of Parliament |url=http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/pathways/citizenship/citizen_subject/origins.htm |publisher=The National Archives |access-date=7 April 2015}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |title=Rise of Parliament |url=http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/pathways/citizenship/rise_parliament/citizenship2.htm |publisher=The National Archives |access-date=7 April 2015}}</ref> during which the notion of long-term political parties took form with the [[New Model Army]] Grandees and humble, [[Levellers|leveller]]-influenced figures debating a new constitution in the [[Putney Debates]] of 1647.<ref>{{cite web |title=Putney debates |url=https://www.bl.uk/taking-liberties/articles/putney-debates |publisher=The British Library |access-date=22 December 2016 |archive-date=22 December 2016 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20161222223321/https://www.bl.uk/taking-liberties/articles/putney-debates |url-status=dead }}</ref> Parliament was largely cowed by the executive during [[the Protectorate]] (1653–1659) and most of the twenty-five years of Charles II's [[English Restoration]] from 1660. However, it, with the advantage of the growth in printed pamphlets and support of the [[City of London]], was able to temper some of the executive excess, intrigue and largesse of the government, especially the [[Cabal ministry]] who signed a [[Secret Treaty of Dover]] that allied [[England]] to [[Kingdom of France|France]] in a prospective war against oft-allies the [[Dutch Republic]].<ref>Durant, Will and Ariel. ''The Age of Louis XIV.'' (page 277) New York: Simon And Schuster, 1963.</ref> It had already passed the [[Habeas Corpus Act 1679]], which strengthened the convention that forbade detention lacking sufficient cause or evidence.

===Glorious Revolution===
{{Main|Glorious Revolution}}
Objecting to the policies of [[Monarchy of the United Kingdom|King]] [[James II of England]] (James&nbsp;VII of [[Scotland]] and James&nbsp;II of Ireland), a group of English Parliamentarians invited the [[Dutch Republic|Dutch]] [[stadtholder]] [[William III of England|William&nbsp;III]] of [[House of Orange-Nassau|Orange-Nassau]] (William of Orange) to overthrow the King. William's successful invasion with a Dutch fleet and army led to James' fleeing to France. In December&nbsp;1688, peers of the realm appointed William as provisional governor. It was widely acknowledged that such action was constitutional if the monarch were incapacitated. The peers summoned an assembly of many members of parliament. This assembly called for an [[Convention Parliament (1689)|English Convention Parliament]] to be elected, which convened on 22&nbsp;January 1689.{{sfn|Anon.|2010|pp=2–4}}<ref>{{cite web|title=Bill of Rights|url=http://www.bl.uk/onlinegallery/takingliberties/staritems/510billofrights.html|publisher=British Library|access-date=23 June 2015|archive-date=22 September 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210922231834/http://www.bl.uk/onlinegallery/takingliberties/index.html|url-status=dead}}</ref>

===Declaration of Right===
{{Main|Declaration of Right, 1689}}
[[File:Samuel Wale, The Bill of Rights Ratified at the Revolution by King William, and Queen Mary, Previous to their Coronation (1783).jpg|thumb|An 18th-century engraving, based on a drawing by [[Samuel Wale]], of the Bill of Rights being presented to [[William III of England|William&nbsp;III]] and [[Mary II of England|Mary&nbsp;II]]]]
The proposal to draw up a statement of rights and liberties and James's violation of them was first made on 29&nbsp;January 1689 in the [[House of Commons of England|House of Commons]], with members arguing that the House "cannot answer it to the nation or Prince of Orange till we declare what are the rights invaded" and that William "cannot take it ill if we make conditions to secure ourselves for the future" in order to "do justice to those who sent us hither". On 2&nbsp;February a committee specially convened reported to the Commons 23&nbsp;Heads of Grievances, which the Commons approved and added some of their own. However, on 4&nbsp;February the Commons decided to instruct the committee to differentiate between "such of the general heads, as are introductory of new laws, from those that are declaratory of ancient rights". On 7&nbsp;February the Commons approved this revised Declaration of Right, and on 8&nbsp;February instructed the committee to put into a single text the Declaration (with the heads which were "introductory of new laws" removed), the resolution of 29&nbsp;January and the Lords' proposal for a revised oath of allegiance. It passed the Commons without division.{{sfn|Horwitz|1977|p=12}}

On 13&nbsp;February the clerk of the House of Lords read the Declaration of Right, and the [[George Savile, 1st&nbsp;Marquess of Halifax|Marquess of Halifax]], in the name of all the estates of the realm, asked William and Mary to accept the throne. William replied for his wife and himself: "We thankfully accept what you have offered us". They then went in procession to the [[Holbein Gate|Great Gate]] at Whitehall. In a ceremony in the [[Banqueting House]], [[Thomas St George|Garter King of Arms]] proclaimed them King and Queen of England, France, and Ireland, whereupon they adjourned to the [[Chapel Royal#St James's Palace|Chapel Royal]], with the [[Henry Compton (bishop)|Bishop of London]] preaching the sermon.{{sfn |Carpenter|1956|pp=145–146}} They were crowned on 11&nbsp;April, swearing an oath to uphold the laws made by Parliament. The [[Coronation Oath Act 1688]]  had provided a new coronation oath, whereby the monarchs were to "solemnly promise and swear to govern the people of this kingdom of England, and the dominions thereunto belonging, according to the statutes in parliament agreed on, and the laws and customs of the same". They were also to maintain the laws of God, the true profession of the Gospel, and the Protestant Reformed faith established by law.{{sfn|Williams|1960|pp=37–39}} This replaced an oath which had deferred more to the monarch. The previous oath required the monarch to rule based on "the laws and customs ... granted by the Kings of England".<ref name=refUKPBoR>{{cite web|title= The Convention and Bill of Rights|url=http://www.parliament.uk/about/living-heritage/evolutionofparliament/parliamentaryauthority/revolution/overview/billofrights/|publisher=UK Parliament|access-date=2 November 2014}}</ref>

==The Act==
The Declaration of Right was enacted in an Act of Parliament, the Bill of Rights 1689, which received [[royal assent]] in December&nbsp;1689.{{sfn|Thatcher|1907|pp=10}} 

The Act asserted "certain ancient rights and liberties" by declaring that:{{sfn|Williams|1960|pp=28–29}} 
*the pretended power of suspending the laws and dispensing with (i.e. ignoring) laws by regal authority without consent of Parliament is illegal; 
*the [[Ecclesiastical Commission of 1686|commission for ecclesiastical causes]] is illegal; 
*levying taxes without grant of Parliament is illegal; 
*it is the right of the subjects to [[petition]] the king, and prosecutions for such petitioning are illegal; 
*keeping a [[Standing army (England)|standing army]] in time of peace, unless it be with consent of Parliament, is against law; 
*Protestants may have [[Right to keep and bear arms|arms for their defence]] suitable to their conditions and as allowed by law; 
*election of members of Parliament ought to be free; 
*the [[freedom of speech]] and debates or proceedings in Parliament ought not to be [[Parliamentary privilege|impeached or questioned]] in any court or place out of Parliament;
*[[excessive bail]] ought not to be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor [[cruel and unusual punishment]]s inflicted; 
*jurors in trials for high treason ought to be freeholders;
*promises of fines and forfeitures before conviction are illegal and void; 
*for redress of all grievances, and for the amending, strengthening and preserving of the laws, Parliaments ought to be held frequently.

The Act declared James's flight from England following the [[Glorious Revolution]] to be an [[abdication]] of the throne. It listed twelve of James's policies by which James designed to "endeavour to subvert and extirpate the protestant religion, and the laws and liberties of this kingdom".{{sfn|Williams|1960|p=26}} These were:{{sfn|Williams|1960|p=27}}
*by assuming and exercising a power of dispensing with and suspending of laws and the execution of laws without consent of Parliament; 
*by prosecuting the [[Seven Bishops]]; 
*by establishing the court of commissioners for ecclesiastical causes; 
*by levying taxes for the use of the Crown by pretence of prerogative as if the same was granted by Parliament; 
*by raising and keeping a standing army within this kingdom in time of peace without consent of Parliament; 
*by causing Protestants to be disarmed at the same time when papists were both armed and employed contrary to law; 
*by violating the freedom of election of members to serve in Parliament; 
*by prosecutions in the Court of King's Bench for matters and causes cognisable only in Parliament, and by divers (diverse) other arbitrary and illegal courses;
*by employing unqualified persons on juries in trials, and jurors in trials for high treason which were not freeholders; 
*by imposing excessive bail on persons committed in criminal cases against the laws made for the liberty of the subjects; 
*by imposing excessive fines and illegal and cruel punishments; 
*by making several grants and promises made of fines and forfeitures before any conviction or judgment against the persons upon whom the same were to be levied; 

all of which were declared to be utterly and directly contrary to the known laws and statutes and freedom of the<!--"this" is not NPOV unless in a direct quotation--> realm.

In a prelude to the [[Act of Settlement 1701|Act of Settlement]] to come twelve years later, the Bill of Rights barred [[Roman Catholic Church|Roman Catholics]] from the throne of England as "it hath been found by experience that it is inconsistent with the safety and welfare of this Protestant kingdom to be governed by a papist prince"; thus [[William III of England|William&nbsp;III]] and [[Mary II of England|Mary&nbsp;II]] were named as the successors of James II and that the throne would pass from them first to Mary's heirs, then to her sister, [[Anne, Queen of Great Britain|Princess Anne of Denmark]] and her heirs (and, thereafter, to any heirs of William by a later marriage).

==Amendments and legacy==
{{See also|Glorious Revolution#Legacy|Declaration of Right, 1689#Results}}
The Bill of Rights was later supplemented by the [[Act of Settlement 1701]], which was agreed to by the [[Parliament of Scotland]] as part of the [[Treaty of Union]]. The Act of Settlement altered the line of succession to the throne laid out in the Bill of Rights.<ref>{{cite web|title=The Act of Settlement|url=http://www.parliament.uk/about/living-heritage/evolutionofparliament/parliamentaryauthority/revolution/overview/actofsettlement/|publisher=UK Parliament|access-date=8 November 2014}}</ref> However, both the Bill of Rights and the [[Claim of Right Act 1689|Claim of Right]] contributed a great deal to the establishment of the concept of [[parliamentary sovereignty]] and the curtailment of the powers of the monarch.<ref>This vigorous assertion of the rights of the subject meant that the Bill of Rights is often seen as parallel in importance with Magna Carta itself. {{cite web |title=The Bill of Rights |url=http://www.bl.uk/collection-items/the-bill-of-rights |publisher=British Library |access-date=27 November 2015 }}{{Dead link|date=August 2025 |bot=InternetArchiveBot |fix-attempted=yes }}</ref><ref>Although the Bill of Rights attacked the abuse of prerogative power rather than prerogative power itself, it had the virtue of enshrining in statute what many regarded as ancient rights and liberties. However, some historians maintain that a more profound change in the relationship between sovereign and Parliament emerged as a result of the financial settlement that Parliament negotiated with William and Mary. {{cite web |url=http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/pathways/citizenship/rise_parliament/making_history_rise.htm |title=Rise of Parliament |publisher=The National Archives |access-date=22 August 2010}}</ref><ref name="USDOS">The earliest, and perhaps greatest, victory for liberalism was achieved in England. The rising commercial class that had supported the Tudor monarchy in the 16th&nbsp;century led the revolutionary battle in the 17th, and succeeded in establishing the supremacy of Parliament and, eventually, of the House of Commons. What emerged as the distinctive feature of modern constitutionalism was not the insistence on the idea that the king is subject to law (although this concept is an essential attribute of all constitutionalism). This notion was already well established in the Middle Ages. What was distinctive was the establishment of effective means of political control whereby the rule of law might be enforced. Modern constitutionalism was born with the political requirement that representative government depended upon the consent of citizen subjects. ... However, as can be seen through provisions in the 1689 Bill of Rights, the English Revolution was fought not just to protect the rights of property (in the narrow sense) but to establish those liberties which liberals believed essential to human dignity and moral worth. The "rights of man" enumerated in the English Bill of Rights gradually were proclaimed beyond the boundaries of England, notably in the American Declaration of Independence of 1776 and in the French Declaration of the Rights of Man in 1789. {{cite web |title=Constitutionalism: America & Beyond |url=http://www.ait.org.tw/infousa/zhtw/DOCS/Demopaper/dmpaper2.html |department=Bureau of International Information Programs |publisher=U.S. Department of State |access-date=30 October 2014 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20141024130317/http://www.ait.org.tw/infousa/zhtw/DOCS/Demopaper/dmpaper2.html |archive-date=24 October 2014}}</ref> These have been held to have established the [[constitutional monarchy]],{{sfn|Walker|Gay|Maer|2009|p=2: "thereby establishing a constitutional monarchy"}} and, along with the [[Penal law (Britain)|penal laws]], settled much of the political and religious turmoil that had convulsed Scotland, England and Ireland in the 17th&nbsp;century.

The Act reinforced the [[Petition of Right]] and the [[Habeas Corpus Act 1679]] by codifying certain rights and liberties. Described by [[William Blackstone]] as ''[[Fundamental Laws of England]]'', the rights expressed in these Acts became associated with the idea of the [[rights of Englishmen]].{{sfn|Billias|2011|p=54}} The Bill of Rights directly influenced the 1776 [[Virginia Declaration of Rights#Drafting and adoption|Virginia Declaration of Rights]],<ref>{{Cite book|last1=Conley|first1=Patrick T.|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=6yyQXl4LmdAC&pg=PA13|title=The Bill of Rights and the States: The Colonial and Revolutionary Origins of American Liberties|last2=States|first2=U. S. Constitution Council of the Thirteen Original|date=1992|publisher=Rowman & Littlefield|isbn=9780945612292|pages=13–15}}</ref>{{refn|Section Seven of the Virginia Declaration of Rights reads,
{{quote|That all power of suspending laws, or the execution of laws, by any authority, without consent of the representatives of the people, is injurious to their rights and ought not to be exercised.}}
which strongly echoes the first two "ancient rights and liberties" asserted in the Bill of Rights 1689:
{{quote|That the pretended power of suspending the laws or the execution of laws by regal authority without consent of Parliament is illegal;<br>
That the pretended power of dispensing with laws or the execution of laws by regal authority, as it hath been assumed and exercised of late, is illegal;}}
And the Virginia Declaration's Section Nine,
{{quote|That excessive bail ought not to be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.}}
is borrowed word for word from the Bill of Rights 1689.|group="nb"}} which in turn influenced the [[United States Declaration of Independence#Influences and legal status|Declaration of Independence]].{{sfn|Maier|1997|pp=126–28}}

Although not a comprehensive statement of civil and political liberties, the Bill of Rights stands as one of the landmark documents in the development of [[civil liberties in the United Kingdom]] and a model for later, more general, statements of rights;<ref>{{Cite book|last=Schwartz|first=Bernard|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=d52OVwT_6PYC&pg=PA1|title=The Great Rights of Mankind: A History of the American Bill of Rights|date=1992|publisher=Rowman & Littlefield|isbn=9780945612285|pages=1–2}}</ref><ref name=refUKPBoR /><ref name="USDOS" /> these include the [[United States Bill of Rights]], the French [[Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen]], the [[United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights]], and the [[European Convention on Human Rights]].<ref name="unesco2011">"All the main principles of the Bill of Rights are still in force today, and the Bill of Rights continues to be cited in legal cases in the UK and in Commonwealth countries. It has a primary place in a wider national historical narrative of documents which established the rights of Parliament and set out universal civil liberties, starting with Magna Carta in 1215. It also has international significance, as it was a model for the US Bill of Rights 1789, and its influence can be seen in other documents which establish rights of human beings, such as the Declaration of the Rights of Man, the United Nations Declaration of Human Rights and the European Convention on Human Rights." {{cite web |title=2011 UK Memory of the World Register |url=http://www.unesco.org.uk/2011-uk-memory-of-the-world-register |publisher=United Kingdom National Commission for UNESCO |date=23 May 2011 |access-date=4 June 2011 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20151208230525/http://www.unesco.org.uk/2011-uk-memory-of-the-world-register/ |archive-date=8 December 2015 |url-status=dead }}</ref><ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.history.com/news/facts-about-the-bill-of-rights-on-its-220th-anniversary |title=Facts About the Bill of Rights on Its 220th Anniversary |date=15 December 2011 |publisher=History.com |access-date=29 September 2012 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20131004215342/http://www.history.com/news/facts-about-the-bill-of-rights-on-its-220th-anniversary |archive-date=4 October 2013 }}</ref> For example, as with the Bill of Rights 1689, the [[US Constitution#Influences|US Constitution]] prohibits excessive bail and "[[cruel and unusual punishment]]"; in fact, the [[Eighth Amendment to the United States Constitution]] which imposes this prohibition is a near-verbatim reproduction of the corresponding article in the Bill of Rights 1689. Similarly, "[[cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment]] or punishment" is banned under Article 5 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and Article&nbsp;3 of the European Convention on Human Rights.

==Current legal status==
The Bill of Rights remains in statute and continues to be cited in legal proceedings in the United Kingdom and other [[Commonwealth realm]]s, particularly Article&nbsp;9 on [[Parliamentary privilege|parliamentary freedom of speech]].{{sfn|Lock|1989|pp=540–561}}<ref name=Topo>{{cite web |author=Toporoski, Richard |url=http://www.monarchist.ca/mc/invisibl.htm |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/19970617074036/http://www.monarchist.ca/mc/invisibl.htm |archive-date=17 June 1997 |title=''Monarchy Canada'': The Invisible Crown |date=Summer 1996}}</ref> Following the [[Perth Agreement]] in 2011, legislation amending the Bill of Rights and the Act of Settlement 1701 came into effect across the Commonwealth realms on 26&nbsp;March 2015 which changed the laws of succession to the British throne.

===Australia===
The Bill of Rights 1689 remains a part of Australian law, however in some states the Bill has been re-enacted in local legislation.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=McDermott |first=Peter M. |date=1990-01-12 |title=Imperial Statutes in Australia and New Zealand |url=https://www.austlii.edu.au/au/journals/BondLawRw/1990/13.pdf |journal=Bond Law Review |volume=2 |issue=2 |doi=10.53300/001c.5180 }}</ref>

The ninth article, regarding parliamentary freedom of speech, was inherited by [[Parliament of Australia|Federal Parliament]] in 1901 under section 49 of the [[Australian Constitution]]. It was incorporated into the ''Parliamentary Privileges Act 1987'' which "preserves the application of the traditional expression of this privilege, but spells out in some detail just what may be covered by the term 'proceedings in Parliament{{'"}}.<ref>{{cite news |title=Infosheet 5 - Parliamentary privilege |publisher=Parliament of Australia |url=https://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/House_of_Representatives/Powers_practice_and_procedure/00_-_Infosheets/Infosheet_5_-_Parliamentary_privilege |access-date=16 August 2020}}</ref>

===Canada===
In Canada, the Bill of Rights remains in statute,<ref>{{cite web |last=Senate of Canada |date=20 March 2013 |title=LCJC Meeting No. 74 |url=http://senparlvu.parl.gc.ca/Guide.aspx?viewmode=4&categoryid=-1&eventid=8763&Language=E |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130614215631/http://senparlvu.parl.gc.ca/Guide.aspx?viewmode=4&categoryid=-1&eventid=8763&Language=E |archive-date=14 June 2013 |access-date=24 March 2013 |publisher=Queen's Printer for Canada |df=dmy-all}}</ref><ref>[https://scc-csc.lexum.com/scc-csc/scc-csc/en/item/2519/index.do ''Re: Resolution to amend the Constitution''<nowiki>, [1981] 1 SCR 753, p. 785.</nowiki>]</ref> although it has been largely superseded by domestic constitutional legislation. The ninth article on parliamentary freedom of speech remains in active use.{{sfn|Lock|1989|pp=540–561}}

===Ireland===
The application of the Bill of Rights to the [[Kingdom of Ireland]] was uncertain. While the English Parliament sometimes passed acts relating to Ireland, the [[Irish Patriot Party]] regarded this as illegitimate, and others felt that English acts only extended to Ireland when explicitly stated to do so, which was not the case for the Bill of Rights. The [[Crown of Ireland Act 1542]] meant the Bill's changes to the royal succession extended to Ireland. [[Bill (law)|Bill]]s modelled on the Bill of Rights were introduced in the [[Parliament of Ireland]] in 1695 and 1697 but not enacted. After the [[Acts of Union 1800]], provisions relating to the rights of Parliament implicitly extended to Ireland, but provisions relating to the rights of the individual were a grey area. Some jurists regarded the bill not as [[positive law]] but as [[declaratory law|declaratory]] of the [[common law]], and as such applicable to Ireland.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Osborough |first1=W. N. |date=1998 |title=The Failure To Enact An Irish Bill Of Rights: A Gap In Irish Constitutional History |journal=Irish Jurist |volume=33 |pages=392–416 |issn=0021-1273 |jstor=44027310}}; {{cite journal |last1=Osborough |first1=W. N. |date=2002 |title=Constitutionally Constructing A Sense Of Oneness: Facets Of Law In Ireland After The Union |journal=Irish Jurist |volume=37 |pages=227–240 |issn=0021-1273 |jstor=44027023}}</ref>

The [[Constitution of the Irish Free State]], and the subsequent [[Constitution of Ireland]], carry over laws in force in the former [[United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland]] to the extent they were not repugnant to those constitutions. The Bill of Rights was not referred to in subsequent Irish legislation<ref>{{cite web |date=26 February 2020 |title=Pre-1922 Legislation: Statutes of England Affected: 1688 |url=http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/isbc/esa1688.html |access-date=11 March 2020 |website=Irish Statute Book}}</ref> until the [[Statute Law Revision Act 2007]], which retained it,<ref>Statute Law Revision Act 2007 [http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/2007/act/28/section/2/enacted/en/html#sec2 §2(2)(a)] and [http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/2007/act/28/schedule/1/enacted/en/html#sched1-part2 Schedule 1 Part 2]</ref> changed its short title to "Bill of Rights 1688"{{refn|name=shorttitle|group="nb"}} and repealed most of section 1 (the preamble) as being religiously discriminatory, which included:<ref>[http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/2007/act/28/section/5/enacted/en/html Statute Law Revision Act 2007 §5(a)]</ref><ref>Statute Law Revision Act 2007 [http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/2007/act/28/section/2/enacted/en/html#sec2 §2(3)]; {{cite web |last1=Kitt |first1=Tom |author-link=Tom Kitt (politician) |date=14 February 2007 |title=Statute Law Revision Bill 2007: Committee Stage |url=https://www.oireachtas.ie/en/debates/debate/seanad/2007-02-14/speech/355/ |access-date=11 March 2020 |website=Seanad Éireann (22nd Seanad) Debates |publisher=Oireachtas |page=c.187 |language=en-ie |no-pp=y |volume=186}}</ref> all words down to "Upon which Letters Elections having been accordingly made"; Article 7, which allowed Protestants to bear arms; and all words from "And they doe Claime Demand and Insist".

The [[Houses of the Oireachtas]] (Inquiries, Privileges and Procedures) Act 2013 repealed Article 9 on "freedom of speech and debates or proceedings in Parliament" as part of a consolidation of the law on [[parliamentary privilege]].<ref>{{cite web |date=24 July 2013 |title=Houses of the Oireachtas (Inquiries, Privileges and Procedures) Act 2013 |url=http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/2013/act/33/enacted/en/html |access-date=11 March 2020 |website=electronic Irish Statute Book |language=en}} §5 and Schedule</ref>

===New Zealand===
The Bill of Rights is part of the laws of New Zealand.<ref name="Bill">{{citation |last=Elizabeth II |title=Royal Succession Bill |url=http://legislation.govt.nz/bill/government/2013/0099/latest/DLM5025805.html |year=2013 |at=S.10, 11, 12 |place=Wellington |publisher=Queen's Printer |quote=The Bill of Rights 1688 (1 Will and Mar Sess 2, c 2) continues to be part of the laws of New Zealand... The Act of Settlement 1700 (12 and 13 Will 3, c 2) continues to be part of the laws of New Zealand... On the changeover, the Royal Marriages Act 1772 ceases to be part of the laws of New Zealand. |access-date=18 July 2013}}</ref> The Act was invoked in the 1976 case of ''[[Fitzgerald v Muldoon and Others]]'',<ref>{{cite web |title=The Constitutional Setting |url=http://www.ssc.govt.nz/display/document.asp?docid=4277&pageno=3 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20081016073216/http://www.ssc.govt.nz/display/document.asp?docid=4277 |archive-date=16 October 2008 |publisher=States Services Commission, New Zealand}}</ref> which centred on the purporting of newly appointed Prime Minister [[Robert Muldoon]] that he would advise the [[Governor-General]] to abolish a [[superannuation]] scheme established by the New Zealand Superannuation Act 1974, without new legislation. Muldoon felt that the dissolution would be immediate and he would later introduce a bill in parliament to retroactively make the abolition legal. This claim was challenged in court and the [[Chief Justice]] declared that Muldoon's actions were illegal as they had violated Article&nbsp;1 of the Bill of Rights, which provides "that the pretended power of dispensing with laws or the execution of laws by regal authority ... is illegal."<ref>{{cite web |title=The legitimacy of judicial review of executive decision-making |url=http://www.lawsociety.org.nz/publications_and_submissions/lawtalk/2010_issues/lawtalk,_issue_743/the_legitimacy_of_judicial_review_of_executive_decision-making |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100204112322/http://www.lawsociety.org.nz/publications_and_submissions/lawtalk/2010_issues/lawtalk,_issue_743/the_legitimacy_of_judicial_review_of_executive_decision-making |archive-date=4 February 2010 |publisher=New Zealand Law Society}}</ref>

===United Kingdom===
[[File:Allegory of the English Bill of Rights.png|thumb|[[Allegory (painting)|Allegory]] of the Bill of Rights, with [[Britannia (personification)|Britannia]] presenting the Bill to [[William III of England|William]] and [[Mary II of England|Mary]]]]
The Bill of Rights applies in England and Wales; it was enacted in the [[Kingdom of England]] which at the time included Wales. Scotland has its own legislation, the [[Claim of Right Act 1689]], passed before the [[Acts of Union 1707|Acts of Union]] between England and Scotland. There are doubts as to whether, or to what extent, the Bill of Rights applies in [[Northern Ireland]], reflecting [[#Ireland|earlier doubts as regards Ireland]].{{sfn|Lock|1989|pp=540–561}}{{refn|group=nb|The United Kingdom consists of four countries and three distinct legal systems: [[England and Wales]], [[Scotland]] and [[Northern Ireland]].<ref>{{cite web |title=A Guide to the UK Legal System |url=http://www.nyulawglobal.org/globalex/United_Kingdom.html |department=Hauser Global Law School Program |publisher=New York University School of Law |access-date=16 March 2016 |date=November 2005}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |title=The Legal System of the United Kingdom |url=http://www.cilex.org.uk/about_cilex_lawyers/the_uk_legal_system.aspx |publisher=The Chartered Institute of Legal Executives |access-date=16 March 2016 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160313232551/http://www.cilex.org.uk/about_cilex_lawyers/the_uk_legal_system.aspx |archive-date=13 March 2016}}</ref> These jurisdictions have particular legal considerations of their own, arising from differences in [[English law]], [[Scots law]] and [[Northern Ireland law]].}}

The requirement that jurors be freeholders in cases of high treason was abolished in England and Wales by the [[Juries Act 1825]], and in Northern Ireland (to the extent it applied) by the [[Statute Law Revision Act 1950]].

[[Natural justice]], the right to a fair trial, is in constitutional law held to temper unfair exploitation of parliamentary privilege. On 21&nbsp;July 1995 a [[libel]] case, ''[[Neil Hamilton (politician)|Neil Hamilton]], MP v [[The Guardian]]'', collapsed as the High Court ruled that the Bill of Rights' total bar on bringing into question anything said or done in the House prevented ''The Guardian'' from obtaining a [[fair trial|fair hearing]]. Hamilton could otherwise have carte blanche to allege any background or meaning to his words, and no contradicting direct evidence, inference, extra submission or cross-examination of his words could take place due to the tight strictures of the Bill of Rights. Equally, the House of Lords decided that, absent a 1996 statutory provision, the Bill of Rights' entrenched parliamentary privilege would have prevented a fair trial for Hamilton in the 2001 defamation action of ''Hamilton v Al-Fayed'' which went through the two tiers of appeal to like effect.<ref>As mentioned in {{cite BAILII
|litigants    = Kimathi & Ors v Foreign and Commonwealth Office
|court        = EWHC
|division     = QB
|year         = 2017
|num          = 3379 
|parallelcite = [2018] 4 WLR 48
|date         = 20 December 2017
|courtname    = auto
|juris        = auto
|para         = 11
}}</ref> That provision was section 13 of the [[Defamation Act 1996]], which permits [[Member of Parliament|MP]]s to waive their [[parliamentary privilege]] and thus cite and have examined their own speeches if relevant to litigation.<ref>{{cite news |author1=Alexander Horne |author2=Oonagh Gay |title=Ending the Hamilton Affair? |newspaper=UK Constitutional Law Association |url=http://ukconstitutionallaw.org/2014/05/21/alexander-horne-and-oonagh-gay-ending-the-hamilton-affair/ |publisher=UK Constitutional Law Association Blog |access-date=19 March 2015 |date=21 May 2014}}</ref>

Following the [[2016 United Kingdom European Union membership referendum|United Kingdom European Union membership referendum]] in 2016, the Bill of Rights was cited by the Supreme Court in the [[R (Miller and Dos Santos) v Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union|''Miller'' case]], in which the court ruled that triggering EU exit must first be authorised by an act of Parliament, because not doing so would abrogate rights secured by an Act of Parliament (namely, rights of EU citizens arising from the EU treaties given effect in UK law by the [[European Communities Act 1972 (UK)|European Communities Act 1972]], as amended).<ref>{{cite BAILII |litigants=R (on the application of Miller & another) v The Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union |year=2016 |court=EWHC |num=2768 |division=Admin |date=3 November 2016}}
{{quote|This subordination of the Crown (i.e. the executive government) to law is the foundation of the [[rule of law]] in the United Kingdom. It has its roots well before the war between the Crown and Parliament in the seventeenth century but was decisively confirmed in the settlement arrived at with the Glorious Revolution in 1688 and has been recognised ever since. Sir Edward Coke reports the considered view of himself and the senior judges of the time in The ''[[Case of Proclamations]]'' (1610) 12&nbsp;Co. Rep.&nbsp;74, that:
{{quote|style=font-size:inherit|the King by his proclamation or other ways cannot change any part of the common law, or statute law, or the customs of the realm}}
and that:
{{quote|style=font-size:inherit|the King hath no prerogative, but that which the law of the land allows him.}}
The position was confirmed in the first two parts of Section&nbsp;1 of the Bill of Rights 1688:
{{quote|style=font-size:inherit|
Suspending power – That the pretended power of suspending of laws or the execution of laws by regall authority without consent of Parlyament is illegall.

Late dispensing power – That the pretended power of dispensing with laws or the execution of laws by regall authoritie as it hath beene assumed and exercised of late<!--transcription error corrected--> is illegall.}}}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |title=Brexit court ruling: Your questions answered |url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-37864983 |access-date=4 November 2016 |work=BBC}}</ref> It was cited again by the Supreme Court in its [[R (Miller) v The Prime Minister and Cherry v Advocate General for Scotland|2019 ruling that the prorogation of parliament was unlawful]]. The Court disagreed with the Government's assertion that prorogation could not be questioned under the Bill of Rights 1689 as a "proceeding of Parliament"; it ruled the opposite assertion, that prorogation "cannot sensibly be described as a 'proceeding in Parliament{{'"}}, as it was imposed upon and not debatable by Parliament, and could bring "core or essential business of Parliament" to an end without debate.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.supremecourt.uk/cases/docs/uksc-2019-0192-judgment.pdf |archive-url=https://ghostarchive.org/archive/20221009/https://www.supremecourt.uk/cases/docs/uksc-2019-0192-judgment.pdf |archive-date=2022-10-09 |url-status=live|title=R (on the application of Miller) (Appellant) v The Prime Minister (Respondent) Cherry and others (Respondents) v Advocate General for Scotland (Appellant) (Scotland)|date=24 September 2019|publisher=The Supreme Court|access-date=24 September 2019|quote=It must therefore follow, as a concomitant of Parliamentary sovereignty, that the power to prorogue cannot be unlimited. Statutory requirements as to sittings of Parliament have indeed been enacted from time to time, for example by the Statute of 1362 (36 Edward III c 10), the Triennial Acts of 1640 and 1664, the Bill of Rights 1688, the Scottish Claim of Right 1689, the Meeting of Parliament Act 1694, and most recently the Northern Ireland (Executive Formation etc) Act 2019, section 3. Their existence confirms the necessity of a legal limit on the power to prorogue, but they do not address the situation with which the present appeals are concerned. ... The prorogation itself takes place in the House of Lords and in the presence of Members of both Houses. But it cannot sensibly be described as a 'proceeding in Parliament'. It is not a decision of either House of Parliament. Quite the contrary: it is something which is imposed upon them from outside. It is not something upon which the Members of Parliament can speak or vote. The Commissioners [when performing the prorogation] are not acting in their capacity as members of the House of Lords but in their capacity as Royal Commissioners carrying out the Queen's bidding. They have no freedom of speech. This is not the core or essential business of Parliament. Quite the contrary: it brings that core or essential business of Parliament to an end.}}</ref>

==Recognition==
Two special designs of commemorative [[British Two Pound coin|two pound coins]] were issued in the United Kingdom in 1989 to celebrate the [[tercentenary]] of the Glorious Revolution. One referred to the Bill of Rights and the other to the Claim of Right. Both depict the [[Royal Cypher]] of William and Mary and the [[Ceremonial mace|mace]] of the [[House of Commons of the United Kingdom|House of Commons]], one also shows a representation of the [[St Edward's Crown]] and the other the [[Crown of Scotland]].<ref>{{cite web |title=Two Pound Coin |url=http://www.royalmint.com/discover/uk-coins/coin-design-and-specifications/two-pound-coin |publisher=The Royal Mint |access-date=15 February 2015}}</ref>

In May&nbsp;2011, the Bill of Rights was inscribed in [[UNESCO]]'s [[UK Memory of the World Register]] recognising that:<ref>{{cite web |title=Life, death and everything in between |url=http://www.parliament.uk/business/news/2011/may/unesco-parliamentary-documents/|publisher=UK Parliament |access-date=4 June 2011 |date=23 May 2011}}</ref>

{{quote|All the main principles of the Bill of Rights are still in force today, and the Bill of Rights continues to be cited in legal cases in the UK and in Commonwealth countries.  It has a primary place in a wider national historical narrative of documents which established the rights of Parliament and set out universal civil liberties, starting with Magna Carta in 1215. It also has international significance, as it was a model for the US Bill of Rights 1789, and its influence can be seen in other documents which establish rights of human beings, such as the Declaration of the Rights of Man, the United Nations Declaration of Human Rights and the European Convention on Human Rights.<ref name=unesco2011 />}}

As part of the [[Parliament in the Making]] programme, the Bill of Rights was on display at the [[Houses of Parliament]] in February&nbsp;2015 and at the [[British Library]] from March to September&nbsp;2015.<ref>{{cite web |title=Magna Carta & Parliament Exhibition |url=http://www.parliament.uk/about/living-heritage/evolutionofparliament/2015-parliament-in-the-making/get-involved1/2015-parliament-in-the-making-events/magna-carta--parliament-exhibition/ |publisher=UK Parliament |access-date=15 February 2015}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |title=Magna Carta: Law, Liberty, Legacy |url=http://www.bl.uk/events/magna-carta--law-liberty-legacy |publisher=The British Library |access-date=24 January 2015 |archive-date=3 March 2016 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160303232538/http://www.bl.uk/events/magna-carta--law-liberty-legacy |url-status=dead }}</ref>

==See also==
* {{anl|Absence of King William Act 1689}}
* {{anl|Crown and Parliament Recognition Act 1689}}
* {{anl|Financial Revolution}}
* [[History of liberalism]]
* {{anl|Toleration Act 1689}}
* {{anl|UK constitutional law}}

==References==
=== Notes ===
{{Reflist|group="nb"}}

=== Citations ===
{{Reflist}}

==Bibliography==
* {{cite web |author=Anon. |title=The Glorious Revolution |url=http://www.parliament.uk/about/how/guides/factsheets/general/g04/ |publisher=House of Commons Information Office |series=Factsheet General Series |volume=G4 |year=2010}}
* {{cite book |last1=Adams |first1=Maurice |last2=Meuwese |first2=Anne |last3=Hirsch Ballin |first3=Ernst |title=Constitutionalism and the Rule of Law: Bridging Idealism and Realism |publisher= Cambridge University Press  |isbn=9781316585221 |year=2017}}
* {{cite book |last1=Billias |first1=George Athan |title=American constitutionalism heard round the world, 1776–1989: A global perspective |date=2011 |publisher=New York University Press |location=New York |isbn=9780814725177 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=ku0TCgAAQBAJ&pg=PA54 |via=Google Books}}
* {{cite web |last=Blick |first=Andrew |title=Magna Carta and contemporary constitutional change |url=http://www.historyandpolicy.org/policy-papers/papers/magna-carta-and-contemporary-constitutional-change |publisher=History and Policy |year=2015}}
* {{cite book |last=Carpenter |first=Edward |year=1956 |title=The Protestant Bishop. Being the Life of Henry Compton, 1632–1713. Bishop of London |url=https://archive.org/details/protestantbishop0000carp |url-access=registration |location=London |publisher=Longmans, Green and Company |oclc=1919768}}
* {{cite book |last=Horwitz |first=Henry |year=1977 |title=Parliament, Policy and Politics in the Reign of William&nbsp;III |publisher=Manchester University Press |isbn=978-0-7190-0661-6 |url-access=registration |url=https://archive.org/details/parliamentpolicy0000horw_o2j8 }}
* {{cite journal |last1=Lock |first1=Geoffrey |title=The 1689 Bill of Rights |journal=Political Studies |date=1989 |volume=37 |issue=4 |pages=540–561 |doi=10.1111/j.1467-9248.1989.tb00288.x |s2cid=143877589 }}
* {{cite book |last=Maier |first=Pauline |author-link=Pauline Maier |title=American Scripture: Making the Declaration of Independence |year=1997 |publisher=Knopf |location=New York |isbn=978-0-679-45492-2 |url-access=registration |url=https://archive.org/details/americanscriptur00maie }}
* {{cite journal |last=Schwoerer |first=Lois G. |title=Locke, Lockean Ideas, and the Glorious Revolution |journal=Journal of the History of Ideas |volume=51 |issue=4 |pages=531–548 |year=1990 |doi=10.2307/2709645 |jstor=2709645}}
* {{cite book |editor-last=Thatcher |editor-first=Oliver Joseph |title=The library of original sources |publisher=University Research Extension |year=1907 |url=https://archive.org/details/libraryoriginal16thatgoog|page=[https://archive.org/details/libraryoriginal16thatgoog/page/n25 10] |quote=Bill of Rights 1689 december 16. }}
* {{cite web |last1=Walker |first1= Aileen |last2=Gay |first2=Oonagh |last3=Maer |first3=Lucinda |year=2009 |title= Bill of Rights 1689 |publisher= House of Commons Library |url= http://www.parliament.uk/business/publications/research/briefing-papers/SN00293/bill-of-rights-1689}}
* {{cite book |last=Williams |first=E. N. |year=1960 |title=The Eighteenth-Century Constitution. 1688–1815 |publisher=Cambridge University Press |oclc=1146699}}
* {{cite web |title=Statute Law Revision Act 2007 |url=http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/2007/act/28/enacted/en/index.html |website=electronic Irish Statute Book  |publisher=[[Attorney General of Ireland]] |access-date=11 March 2020 |language=en |date=8 May 2007}}

==External links==
{{Wikisource}}
{{commons|English Bill of Rights of 1689}}
* [http://avalon.law.yale.edu/17th_century/england.asp Text of the Bill of Rights] Yale Law School Law Library
* {{UK-LEG|path=aep/WillandMarSess2/1/2/contents}}
* {{cite web |url=http://www.parliament.uk/about/living-heritage/evolutionofparliament/parliamentaryauthority/revolution/collections1/collections-glorious-revolution/billofrights/ |title=The Parliamentary Archives}} holds the original document
{{Succession to the British throne}}
{{UK legislation}}
{{Constitution of Canada|pre-confederation}}

{{Authority control}}

{{DEFAULTSORT:Bill of Rights 1689}}
[[Category:Acts of the Parliament of England 1689]]
[[Category:Acts of the Parliament of England still in force]]
[[Category:Acts of the Parliament of England concerning religion]]
[[Category:History of Christianity in the United Kingdom]]
[[Category:Law about religion in the United Kingdom]]
[[Category:Christianity and law in the 17th century]]
[[Category:1689 in Christianity]]
[[Category:Civil rights and liberties in the United Kingdom]]
[[Category:Civil rights and liberties legislation]]
[[Category:Constitution of Canada]]
[[Category:Constitution of New Zealand]]
[[Category:Constitution of the United Kingdom]]
[[Category:Constitutional laws of England]]
[[Category:Glorious Revolution]]
[[Category:History of human rights]]
[[Category:Mary II]]
[[Category:Political charters]]
[[Category:Succession acts]]
[[Category:Succession to the British crown]]
[[Category:Succession to the Canadian Crown]]
[[Category:William III of England]]