Bob Morris' comment on the Succession to the Crown Bill invites the Church of England to ‘fresh, bound-breaking’ thinking about Church of England establishment in light of the role of the Supreme Governor of the Church of England and the statutory obligation for the Sovereign to maintain communion with the Church of England. Along with other writers he argues that, in effect, this leaves us with religious freedom in the UK but not religious equality. I hope that Morris' challenge will stimulate such fresh thought – my response is not yet this but concerns another matter that he raises in relation to Roman Catholic marriages. He repeats concern in both Houses of Parliament that children of ‘mixed marriages’ are obliged to be brought up as Roman Catholics, and he correctly questions the extent of such an absolute obligation contra an article in the Catholic Herald.

In R v NS the Supreme Court of Canada (SCC) was asked to consider a straightforward question: must a Muslim woman remove a niqab (face covering leaving only the eyes showing) when giving evidence in a sexual assault case in which she is the complainant. Two justices said ‘yes’; one said ‘almost always, no’; and the majority said ‘maybe yes, maybe no – it depends’. The matter was then returned to the preliminary inquiry judge to make the actual decision, which could still be subject again to appeal to the SCC. The court divided on the three available answers to the question: yes, no and maybe. The division, however, leaned in favour of requiring removal of the niqab because the reasons for judgment favouring ‘maybe’ were concurred in in the result by those favouring removal. In the end, the court did not give a clear answer to the question, but rather provided a four-part test for trial judges who must continue to make the decision, subject to appeal. The practical utility of this response may be doubted.

The judgment of the European Court of Human Rights in Eweida and others v United Kingdom1 related to two pairs of cases.2 The first pair concerned a British Airways check-in clerk and a nurse, each of whom complained that dress codes at their respective places of work prevented them from openly wearing a small cross on a chain around their neck. In the second pair, a registrar of marriages and a relationship counsellor refused to offer their respective services to same-sex couples on the basis that homosexual acts were incompatible with their religious beliefs. Having failed to obtain relief in the domestic courts, all four applicants took their claims to Strasbourg, which heard oral argument last September. Judgment was pronounced on 15 January 2013. This Comment considers the broad thrust of the judgment, particularly the threefold manner by which the Court has clarified and embedded the right to freedom of religion, the practical outcome in the individual cases, and the likely effect of the judgment upon future litigation in the domestic courts of the United Kingdom.

After the Administrative Court (Toulson LJ, Royce and Macur JJ) had rejected the applications of the late Mr Tony Nicklinson and an anonymous claimant, AM, to allow doctors to end their lives without fear of prosecution, The Times reported that Anna Soubry, Conservative MP for Broxtowe and a newly appointed minister at the Department of Health, was supporting ‘the right to kill yourself’. She was subsequently supported in turn by her Liberal Democrat ministerial colleague Norman Lamb, who told the BBC that, though the issue was one for the individual's conscience and there was no Government policy on it, there was a case for looking at reform. The Ministry of Justice subsequently let it be known that there were no plans to change the existing law.

The most significant legislative business considered by the Synod in 2012 was again that relating to the consecration of women to the episcopate.

In January the Charity Commission published its annual return form for 2013. It is largely similar to earlier versions but there are additional questions about whether or not the charity is registered for Gift Aid, its property holdings and whether any of its land or buildings is used for the charity's purposes. In addition, for 2013 the questions on overseas activities and numbers of volunteers that were previously optional are mandatory.

General Assemblies normally address a wide range of issues and the Assembly of 2012 was no exception. On 23 May the Archbishop of Canterbury addressed the General Assembly on the challenges facing both the Church of Scotland and his own Church – and on how they might respond.

In addition to a series of minor, technical changes to the Clergy Discipline Measure 2003 the Clergy Discipline (Amendment) Measure 2013 amends the 2003 Measure in three main respects.

As always, the 2012 meetings of the Governing Body addressed issues of relevance both to wider society in Wales and to the domestic life of the Church. The Archbishop's Presidential Address to the April meeting focused on the likelihood of the extension of civil marriage to same-sex partners and the issues raised by Equal Civil Marriage: a consultation. If the legislation to allow same-sex civil marriage were passed, said the Archbishop, ‘I cannot see how we, as a Church, will be able to ignore the legality of the status of such partnerships and we ought not to want to do so’. In September, on the other hand, he concentrated on what he described as ‘musings on the underlying philosophy of The Church in Wales Review Report’ and, in particular, on what the Report had to say about the Gospel and the Church as an institution.

Although six bills appeared on the agenda paper for Dublin this year there was only one of real substance. Two were to correct some cross-references in previous legislation, one was of a technical nature relating to voluntary pension contributions and a further bill imposed a requirement on dioceses to provide statistics to central Church bodies when demanded.

To a Synod with little controversial on the agenda apart from the decision about the Anglican Covenant, the Primus in his charge at the opening Eucharist spoke of the economic wilderness through which society and the Church were travelling. The Covenant had been a response to the apparent wilderness of disagreement and disorder in the Anglican Communion, and he hoped that the Synod would express its deep commitment to the version of the Communion in which members were drawn closer to one another. The Scottish Church aspired to be fully engaged in society.