Royal prerogative

Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

Part of the Politics series
Monarchy
Heraldic royal crown
Central concepts
Types
Philosophy

Philosophers

Works

Politicians
History
  • Nepalese Civil War
    		•
    Polity
    Administration
    Related ideologies
    National variants
    Related topics
    icon Politics portal

    The royal prerogative is a body of customary authority, privilege, and immunity recognised in common law (and sometimes in civil law jurisdictions possessing a monarchy) as belonging to the sovereign, and which have become widely vested in the government.[note 1] It is the means by which some of the executive powers of government, possessed by and vested in a monarch with regard to the process of governance of the state, are carried out.

    Evolution

    In most

    Mary II were invited to take the throne.[citation needed
    ]

    In the United Kingdom, the remaining powers of the royal prerogative are devolved to the head of the government, which, for more than two centuries, has been the Prime Minister; the benefits, equally, such as ratification of treaties and mineral rights in all gold and silver ores, vest in (belong to) the government.[1][citation needed]

    In Britain, prerogative powers were originally exercised by the monarch acting without an observed requirement for

    William IV.[citation needed
    ]

    Typically, in

    state power.[citation needed
    ]

    Ministerial exercise of the monarch's prerogatives

    Today, prerogative powers fall into two main categories:

    Some key areas of government are carried out by the royal prerogative, but its usage is falling as functions are progressively made statutory.[citation needed]

    Commonwealth realms

    United Kingdom

    Main article: Royal prerogative in the United Kingdom

    In the Kingdom of England (up to 1707), the Kingdom of Great Britain (1707–1800), and the United Kingdom (since 1801), the royal prerogative was, has been, and is one of the central features of the realm's governance.

    Constitutional theorist A. V. Dicey defines the scope of prerogative powers as:

    the remaining portion of the Crown's original authority, and it is therefore ... the name for the residue of discretionary power left at any moment in the hands of the Crown, whether such power be in fact exercised by the King himself or by his Ministers.[3]

    The scope of the royal prerogative is difficult to determine due to the

    common law of England
    , making the courts the final arbiter of whether a particular type of prerogative exists or not. Nevertheless, certain prerogative powers have been widely acknowledged and accepted over time, while others have fallen out of use.

    The royal prerogative is not constitutionally unlimited. In the

    Queen Mary II to power, this interpretation of there being a separate and distinct power of the judiciary has not been challenged by the Crown. It has been accepted that it is emphatically the province of the court(s) to say what the law is, or means. This is a crucial corollary and foundation to the concept of the judicial power; and its distinct and separate nature from the executive power possessed by the Crown itself, or its ministers. In most cases, the Monarch exercises the prerogative powers only on the advice of the Government of the day, either directly or through the Privy Council
    .

    British dependencies

    Generally,

    British overseas territories
    however, each inhabited territory has a constitution by which the territory is governed locally.

    The absoluteness of the royal prerogative in the colonies was however defeated in the case of

    Campbell v. Hall in 1774. This case decided that once a colony gained a representative assembly (or once the governor has been instructed to call one), the royal authority is limited to the familiar prerogatives; without the assembly's consent the Crown could not raise taxation nor change the law. Several of the colonies of the British West Indies thus became "settled colonies", and reverted to "crown colony" status only by Act of Parliament in the nineteenth century.[5]

    In August 2009,

    ministers and the House of Assembly. This action was not an exercise of the royal prerogative, as it was made under "the West Indies Act 1962 and of all other powers enabling Her to do so", but did vest wide discretionary legislative and executive powers in Her Majesty's governor, who as in all British Overseas Territories, acts on the instructions of the UK government, not the monarch. A new constitution was promulgated in October 2012 and the government was returned to full local administration after the November 2012 elections.[7][8]
    : 56 

    In the case of the

    House of Lords against the previous rulings. The House decided by a three-to-two majority that the Order in Council was a lawful exercise of authority.[9][10]
    In their speeches, the Law Lords admitted the government of the day was morally wrong to force out some 2,000 residents of the Chagos Archipelago, a British Crown colony, to make way for a US air base in the 1960s. Nevertheless, the majority could not find legal fault in the Order.

    Canada

    In Canada, the royal prerogative is, for the most part, the same as that in the United Kingdom, as constrained by constitutional convention,[11] although its exercise is usually through the federal governor general in the Privy Council of Canada, or the provincial lieutenant governors in the provincial executive councils. The royal prerogative in Canada is largely set out in Part III of the Constitution Act, 1867, particularly section 9.[12][13]

    As foreign affairs are a matter of royal prerogative,

    armed forces belongs to the Crown, though only in its federal Cabinet (the federal government), as outlined in sections 9 and 15 of the Constitution Act, 1867.[13] Neither legislation nor any other type of parliamentary approval, beyond budgetary matters, is required for such actions, though the Cabinet has on occasion consulted parliament before engaging Canada or extending Canada's involvement in a conflict.[14] Additionally, the federal Crown may ratify treaties. Again, the endorsement of Parliament is not necessary for these agreements to have force in an international sense, but the federal Parliament and the provincial legislatures must pass statutes in order for them to have domestic effect, under the division of powers set out in sections 91 and 92 of the Constitution Act, 1867. Proposed treaties have also occasionally been presented to parliament for debate before ratification.[14] Members of Parliament have tabled bills seeking to curtail the use of the royal prerogative in foreign affairs by legislating a greater role for parliament, as have Senate standing committees, from time to time, called for the same.[14]

    Federal Court of Appeal, and ultimately the Supreme Court of Canada
    did not find in favour of either Khadr, nor Kamel.

    The royal prerogative in Canada extends also to the granting of honours, as explained by the

    Black v. Chrétien (regarding Conrad Black's entitlement to an appointment to the House of Lords while a Canadian citizen).[13] Other royal prerogatives, such as the prerogative of mercy, also exist in the Canadian context, although largely supplanted for criminal matters by statutory provisions.[16]

    Other Commonwealth realms

    In the other

    Commonwealth realms, the royal prerogative can be or is specifically mandated to be exercised by the monarch's representative, the governor-general. In the case of Australia, the royal prerogative, although resides in the monarch, it is exercisable by the governor-general of Australia for military affairs and is defined by the Constitution of Australia.[17]

    The constitution of a Commonwealth realm may also sharply limit the prerogative. In some cases, governmental acts which would normally require royal prerogative may be enacted through other means in the constitution, or through a legislative act in a Commonwealth realm, such as was seen in the United Kingdom, where a previous act of parliament dictated the conditions in which an early election could be called, which was a purely Royal Prerogative prior to its passage.[18]

    Spain

    See also: Monarchy of Spain

    The

    non-partisan
    and independent monarchy. Receiving government advice does not necessarily bind the monarch into executing the advice, except where prescribed by the constitution.

    It is incumbent upon the King:

    a. to sanction and promulgate the laws;
    b. to summon and dissolve the Cortes Generales and to call elections under the terms provided in the Constitution;
    c. to call a referendum in the circumstances provided for in the Constitution;
    d. to propose a candidate for
    President of the Government
    and, as the case may be, appoint him or remove him from office, as provided in the Constitution;
    e. to appoint and dismiss members of the Government on the proposal of its President;
    f. to issue the decrees agreed upon by the
    Council of Ministers
    , to confer civil and military employments and award honours and distinctions in conformity with the law;
    g. to keep himself informed regarding affairs of State and, for this purpose, to preside over the meetings of the Council of Ministers whenever he deems opportune, at the request of the President of the Government;
    h. to exercise supreme command of the Armed Forces;
    i. to exercise the right to grant pardons in accordance with the law, which may not authorize general pardons;
    j. to exercise the High Patronage of the Royal Academies.[19][20]

    See also

    Notes

    1. Commonwealth realms, the wording the Crown
      is usually used in this context instead of king or queen.

    References

    1. Regina v Earl of Northumberland
      )
    2. ^ "UK Parliament – PASC 19". Queen's Printer for Parliament.
    3. ^ "House of Commons – Public Administration – Fourth Report".
    4. Campbell v. Hall
      , 1774
    5. 39 & 40 Vict.
      c. 47)
    6. ^ The Turks and Caicos Islands Constitution (Interim Amendment) Order 2009
    7. ^ Bounds, John H.; Ferguson, James A. "Turks and Caicos Islands". Encyclopedia Britannica. Retrieved 15 November 2022.
    8. ^ Clegg, Peter (2013). "The United Kingdom and its Caribbean overseas territories: Present relations and future prospects" (PDF). Caribbean Journal of International Relations & Diplomacy. 1 (2): 53–64. Archived (PDF) from the original on 31 January 2017.
    9. ^ "Britain wins appeal over Chagos islanders' return home". Archived from the original on 29 May 2013. Retrieved 24 October 2008.
    10. ^ "Chagos islanders cannot return home". Archived from the original on 26 October 2008.
    11. ^ Hicks, Bruce M. (2010). "British and Canadian Experience with the royal prerogative" (PDF). Canadian Parliamentary Review. Summer 2010. Commonwealth Parliamentary Association: 18–24. Retrieved 18 April 2011.
    12. ^ Branch, Legislative Services (7 August 2020). "Consolidated federal laws of canada, The Constitution Acts, 1867 to 1982". laws-lois.justice.gc.ca.
    13. ^ a b c "War power and the royal prerogative". Law Times. 1 May 2006. Archived from the original on 1 April 2013. Retrieved 18 April 2011.
    14. ^ a b c d Barnett, Laura; Spano, Sebastian (10 November 2008). Library of Parliament (ed.). "Parliamentary Involvement in Foreign Policy". Queen's Printer for Canada. Retrieved 23 October 2012.
    15. ^ Canadian Passport Order, SI/81-86.
    16. ^ Cloverdale ARPA. "Latimer's Appeal for the royal prerogative of Mercy". ARPA Canada. Archived from the original on 7 October 2011. Retrieved 18 April 2011.
    17. ^ "Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act – Sect 68 Command of naval and military forces". Commonwealth Consolidated Acts. Retrieved 26 August 2018.
    18. ^ Kelly, Richard (2014). "Prerogative Powers and the Fixed-term Parliaments Act". Retrieved 6 June 2024.
    19. ^ a b "Constitución española de 1978: 04 - Wikisource". es.wikisource.org.
    20. ^ a b "Inicio - Castellano - Casa Real". www.casareal.es.
    21. ^ "Constitución española de 1978: 06 - Wikisource". es.wikisource.org.
    22. ^ "Constitución española de 1978: 08 - Wikisource". es.wikisource.org.

    Further reading

    • A. B. Keith
      , The King and the Imperial Crown (1936)
    • Joseph Chitty, The Prerogatives of the Crown (monograph from 1820)
    • Stanley de Smith and Rodney Brazier, Constitutional and Administrative Law
    • Walter Bagehot, The English Constitution
    • Blick, Andrew. 2014. "Emergency powers and the withering of the Royal Prerogative." International Journal of Human Rights 18, no. 2: 195–210.
    Look up prerogative in Wiktionary, the free dictionary.
    Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Royal_prerogative&oldid=1277401132"