Access to British justice is at risk and individuals will soon find it almost impossible to enforce their rights and make others meet their obligations, the president of the Law Society has warned.

In the year in which the nation celebrates the 800th anniversary of the Magna Carta, the document regarded as being the foundation of the rule of law, Andrew Caplen calls for the "current efficacy" of the rule of law to be "urgently" examined.

Writing on for the think tank Theos, he says this is of "much more significance" than the anniversary itself with its attendant events, souvenirs and even a visit to the UK by 1,000 members of the American Bar Association.

"Access to justice is a fundamental corollary to the rule of law because without it the rule of law can be nothing more than just a concept, an ideal," he warns. "If access to justice is absent, legal rights cannot be exercised and legal obligations cannot be enforced. Thus it is essential to a humane, just and civilized society. And it is at risk."

He cites cuts and restrictions in the Legal Aid budget, meaning that around 600,000 fewer cases can be funded this way, as just one example. Another is a rise in court fees, to be implemented soon, which will see them go up in some courts by as much as 600 per cent.

"There is a real risk that the cumulative effect of these changes will be that individual citizens will find themselves unable to afford to seek to enforce their rights and the obligations of others."

He calls for the Church to speak out for everyone on the issue, and not just for the rights of Christians.

"The Church should take the lead in expressing the need and seek to influence the political agenda," he says.

He was writing upon publication of his new report, "Speaking Up – Defending and Delivering Access to Justice", written with David McIlroy, in which church leaders from across the denominations argue that Christians have a "particular responsibility" to speak out for the voiceless.

The report itself says legal aid is now only available in a small number of clinical negligence cases, and is no longer available in most divorce cases or cases about contact between parents and children.

It is also no longer available in most housing law, employment, debt, immigration, education, and welfare benefit cases.

"These changes directly affect the life-chances of some of the most vulnerable in our society. The justification advanced by government for these changes is a financial one," the authors say. "The effect of the recent changes is likely to affect adversely the most disadvantaged in our society. In the longer term it threatens social cohesion, accountability of public bodies and powerful private individuals, and the rule of law. A welfare state is not a substitute for a just state."