Tag: Monarch
-
Francesca Jackson: King Charles, the Speech from the Throne and the Constitutional Shift from the ‘Dignified’ to the ‘Efficient’: A Challenge to the Doctrine of Political Neutrality?
Bagehot famously made a distinction between the ‘dignified’ and ‘efficient’ parts of the Constitution (Walter Bagehot, The English Constitution (London: Henry S. King and Company 1867)). The former were those which ‘excite and preserve the reverence of the population’, and were epitomised by the grandeur and splendour of the monarchy. The latter were those by…
-
Craig Prescott: Harry and Meghan, Regency, Counsellors of State and a “Slimmed Down” Royal Family
Introduction On 19th January, after discussions within the Royal Family, it was announced that the Duke and Duchess of Sussex will step back from royal duties, no longer receive public funds, or ‘formally represent the Queen’. Neither will they use their HRH titles, and more generally they will not be classed as ‘working members of…
-
Michael Detmold: The Monarch in the Room
(Let’s be clear. Why is an Australian constitutional lawyer writing about the UK Constitution? It’s simple. She’s our Queen, too.) The Court in Miller/Cherry (at 35) distinguished between the question ‘whether a prerogative power exists’ and ‘whether, granted that a prerogative power exists, and that it has been exercised within its limits, the exercise of…
-
Robert Craig: What Could Happen Next If the Government Resigns Rather than Send the Letter to the EU?
This post follows on from a previous piece where I attempted to set out the general rules, and a flowchart, to create a route map in the event of a vote of no confidence. This post seeks to address the narrower question of what could happen if the Prime Minister (‘PM’) refused to send the…
-
Michael Detmold: The Proper Denial of Royal Assent
Twenty-one eminent constitutional lawyers expressed this view in a letter to the Times (3 4 19): ‘Any attempt to advise refusal of Royal Assent to a Bill passed by Parliament would stand constitutional principle on its head. It would presume a governmental power to override Parliament, yet it is in Parliament, not the Executive, that…
-
David Howarth: Westminster versus Whitehall: Two Incompatible Views of the Constitution
Lawyers like to make as much sense as possible of the material in front of them, transforming it, if they can, from a jumble of decisions and remarks into a coherent whole. For constitutional lawyers that habit of mind is both a blessing and a curse. It is a blessing because it causes lawyers to…
-
John Finnis: Royal Assent – A Reply to Mark Elliott
I agree with Mark Elliott in finding my April 1 argument about prorogation and assent astonishing and monstrous, once the argument’s important premises have been omitted, as he has omitted them. And it is left even more objectionable when he has attributed to it a premise, two assumptions, and a goal each far from my…
-
Jeff King: Can Royal Assent to a Bill Be Withheld If So Advised by Ministers?
An article in the Sunday Times by Professor Richard Ekins and Sir Stephen Laws QC advised that the Monarch could withhold Royal Assent to a bill passed if advised to do so by ministers. Robert Craig has also argued for that position in a blog post, making clear why in his view that is the…