The Royal Prerogative are a set number of powers and privileges held by The Queen as part of the British constitution. Nowadays, a lot of these powers are exercised on Her Majesty’s behalf by ministers – things such as issuing or withdrawing passports that, without the Royal Prerogative, would require an act of parliament each time.
Over time, the prerogative powers have been used less and less though the important thing in our Constitutional Monarchy is that they still exist, they remain a means of protecting democracy in this country ensuring that no one can simply seize power.
Victorian constitutionalist Walter Bagehot defined The Queen’s rights as, the right ‘to be consulted, to encourage and to warn’ – but these rights are not the same as her powers, as we will now see.
The Queen’s prerogative powers vary and fall into different categories…
The Queen’s political powers nowadays are largely ceremonial, though some are actively used by The Queen such as at General Elections or are available in times of crisis and some are used by Ministers for expediency when needed.
The Queen’s judicial powers are now very minimal, and there is only really one which is used on a regular basis, with others having been delegated to judges and parliament through time.
The Queen’s powers in the Armed Forces are usually used on the advice of Generals and Parliament though some functions are retained by The Queen herself nowadays.
One of the main prerogative powers that are still used personally by The Queen these days is the power to grant honours. As all honours derive from the Crown, The Queen has the final say on knighthoods, peerages and the like.
Other powers Her Majesty holds include:
photo credit: UK Parliament via photopin cc
Does the sovereign really use her power regarding honours ? We know that Garter/Thistle/Merit appointments are decided ony by her majesty, but I guess that the queen may turn down honours proposals, and that leakages aren`t supposed to happen.
Is it true that the queen have developed a personally restrictive approach regarding the creation of hereditary titles ? The PM did nominate individuals for hereditary honours until the Harold Wilson era, then it stopped with a few exceptions during the Thatcher era. I`m surprised that Cameron hasn`t revived the herditary peerage, since he is a traditional tory politican. Maybe we get a couple of creations in his resignation honours list.
Can the Queen claim any nation she want’s to?
Yes, but only within the commonwealth. She could for example claim Canada and Australia among others.
Which part of it?
What about in business throughout the commonwealth- how much power is she entitled to?
Absolute power! She has the ability to rescind business licenses! Shire, it’s delegated to an authority writhin the government, but she can exercise her power, and it will not be challenged…. Ultimately, whoever controls the military has absolute power, and she controls the military, without question! Every military person in every Commonwealth realm pledges allegiance to the queen, not to the country! Anyone who believes the citizens live in a free country, with a “ceremonial monarchy” are nothing more than sheep in the herd.
Does she have the authority to order executions without due legal process or interfere in the distribution of private estate matters?
I believe the HRH Queen Elizabeth the second is not the most powerful person in Britian But the World She is the Commander in Chief of all her Realms an we in NZ swear allegiance to the Queen not the Government.So All armed forces and police Fireman Air force Navy and other government officials are under her command.Although she has not exercised this authority she has this power.So stick that Ceremonial stuff a side and remember she rules.The biggest armies Navies Air Forces in the World.!!!!
I wish i was born in this family….. sure next time with the name prince Richard !!! Mark it..!!!
Her majesty retains ultimate power over the United Kingdom, and largely over the Commonwealth realms. You should note in this article, items such as judicial powers are described as “having been delegated to judges and commisoners”. What that means is, the queen has the authority and power, she just so chooses to delegate the day to day decision making to subordinates, such as judges. Not unlike a corporate CEO would delegate responsibility to management, yet could overrule the managers decision at any time. Make NO MISTAKE ABOUT IT, the UK is RULED by an absolute monarchy! The fact that the monarch chooses to allow the people a voice, through parliament does not mean anything with regards to absolute control. Heck, the prime minister is chosen by the queen, she chooses to select the prime minister with the most support, and the prime minister is well aware of this fact! If the queen wants something done, all she needs to do is send a private letter, and it wi be done, for the power she weilds is absolute and she will not be challenged, period! The only thing standing in the way of the queen, would be an all out revolt of the citizenry, not unlike the same risk as any other time in history. Placate the people just enough to prevent all out revolt, and she has nothing that stands between her, and absolute power!
The “Pardon” issue is used here in the states a lot by the President and governors. Often used actually.
Damn the Queen have a lot on her plate and has more power then the President here in the 50 states he got.
Sir, I do believe you need to learn proper grammar.
To receive the latest Royal Central posts straight to your email inbox, enter your email address below and press subscribe.
Join 663 other subscribers