Commonwealth Realm: Encyclopedia II - Commonwealth Realm - Constitutional implications

Commonwealth Realm - Constitutional implications

Commonwealth Realm - Historical development

Before 1926, the monarch of the United Kingdom had nominally reigned over the Dominions as a single imperial domain, with a governor-general representing the British government. The Dominions were self-governing, but their ability to legislate remained theoretically subject to the British Parliament. Even though the Dominions were members of the League of Nations, the United Kingdom retained responsibility for their foreign policy and defence.

The Balfour Declaration of 1926 recognised that in practice the Dominions had in recent years evolved into sovereignty and declared that they were autonomous and equal in status. As a result, each of the governments of the Dominions established a separate and direct relationship with the monarchy, with the governor-general now acting as a personal representative of the monarch. The first result of the new convention was the Royal and Parliamentary Titles Act 1927, which implicitly recognized the Irish Free State as separate from the United Kingdom.

More significantly, formal legislative independence for the Dominions, with some minor reservations that were in practice never enforced, was enacted by the passage of the Statute of Westminster, 1931 (Imp). In some Dominions, adoption of the Statute was subject to ratification by the Dominion parliaments, which was delayed by several years in Australia and New Zealand, and which never occurred in Newfoundland.

Historically, proponents of the monarchy were generally supportive of the monarchy as a symbolic link to the United Kingdom. During the late 19th and early 20th centuries most politicians in the Domonions, which were then self-governing colonies, supported their economic and military ties with the UK, tended to view British culture and attitudes as favourable, and encouraged their prominence in the newly developing societies, although there were difficulties when Britain's broader imperial policies were enforced at the expense of the interests of various dominions: for example, the Alaska Boundary Dispute. Maintaining allegiance to the British monarch was thus seen as a natural thing for many residents, and membership in the British Empire, even with a secondary constitutional status, was considered more desirable than independence. Autonomy in foreign policy was acknowledged in the Balfour Declaration of 1926 to have accrued to the dominions, an acknowledgment given statutory formality by the Statute of Westminster and, afterwards, with the emergence of the modern Commonwealth of Nations. The decline in the imperial mentality led to a gradual process of removing residual legislative and judicial ties and establishing a separate citizenship. Since the 1980s, none of the 15 other Commonwealth Realms has retained any strong constitutional links to the United Kingdom.

Commonwealth Realm - Monarch's role in the Realms

Though the Queen's constitutional powers are virtually identical in each Realm, she does not usually act as political Head of State except in the UK, nor does she commonly perform ceremonial duties, except on occasions of significant historical or political importance. This results from the fact that she resides in the UK, even though she usually visits the other major Commonwealth Realms at least once every five or six years. Day to day political and ceremonial duties are instead performed in each Realm by a Governor General who serves as the Queen's permanent representative. Nominally, the Governor General is appointed by the Queen. In reality, he or she is chosen by the nation's Prime Minister, or, in the unique case of Papua New Guinea, by Parliamentary vote.

The concern is sometimes raised that, as head of state of so many different countries, the Queen's neutrality and loyalty could come into question should a conflict ever emerge between two of her realms. Republicans in Commonwealth Realms often argue that ultimately, the Queen will express loyalty to the actions of the British Government above all other realms, since she resides in the UK, and is more involved in the British political process than in any other nation. However, this proposition has never been tested.

Historically, a few situations have arisen in which such a conflict of interest could have occurred.

In 1939, Canada declared war a few days after the UK did, so that George VI, as king of both countries, was simultaneously at war and at peace with Germany. A more extreme example is the Indo-Pakistani War of 1947. George VI, as head of state of both warring nations, was, in a legal sense, at war with himself.

In 1983, during Operation Urgent Fury, Queen Elizabeth was the Queen of Grenada while it was being invaded by many other Caribbean countries of which she was also Queen. Additionally, the invasion was also opposed by several other countries in which she was Queen, notably United Kingdom and Belize. The Queen did not make a statement on the invasion, possibly because no statement she could have made would have adequately represented all the countries involved of which she was Queen.

Commonwealth Realm - Sovereignty of the Realms

The Commonwealth realms are sovereign states and the United Kingdom no longer holds any legislative power over them, although some countries continue to use the British Judicial Committee of the Privy Council as part of their judiciary.

Because they share the same head of state, the Commonwealth realms are in a personal union relationship. This relationship is voluntary and symmetric. In each realm the Queen has a distinct legal personality and acts on the advice only of the government of that country. The monarchy is thus no longer an exclusively British institution, although it may often be called British for historical reasons, for convenience, or for political (usually republican) purposes. Each realm determines its own titles and styles of the monarch and any consort.

As a consequence of this relationship, any alterations to the line of succession to the throne must be approved by the parliaments of all the realms in order to guarantee continuity of a single monarch. For example, there have been suggestions of removing the religious requirements from the Act of Settlement, which currently defines the succession. In practice, since each realm is a sovereign state, this requires the voluntary cooperation of all 16 of the realms. Alternatively, a realm could choose to end its participation in the shared monarchy.

Commonwealth Realm - One Crown or several?

It is commonly held that there is now a separate Crown in each of the Commonwealth Realms, united only in the person of the monarch and matters directly related to the person of the monarch such as the laws affecting succession.

The Crown has become an institution that operates separately in each Commonwealth Realm, with the Queen in right of each realm being a distinct legal person. The institution of the monarchy, the succession, and obviously the Queen herself, are shared by all the Realms in a symmetrical fashion. Thus, the Crown has both a separate and a shared character, and, in different contexts, "Crown" may mean the crown as shared or the crown in each realm considered separately.

Normally, in realms other than the United Kingdom, the Queen personally only exercises those powers related to her appointment of a Governor-General (and even this is done on the advice of the prime minister of the realm concerned), but her name and image continue to play a prominent role in political institutions and symbols. For example, the Queen's image usually appears on coins and banknotes, and an oath of allegiance to her is usually required from politicians, judges, and new citizens.

From a cultural standpoint, how the Crown is shared is not as clear. Some argue that the Crown within their particular country remains essentially British and primarily of the United Kingdom, whereas others emphasise the larger body of the Crown as a shared link between the Commonwealth Realms, and the Crown in right of their nation as having specific domestic characteristics.

Adapted from the Wikipedia article "Constitutional implications", under the G.N U Free Docmentation License. Please also see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki