Editing Commonwealth realm (section)

== The Crown's role ==
{{Multiple image
|total_width=260
|align      =left
|image1     =The Queen of Australia.jpg
|image2     =Queen Elizabeth II of New Zealand.jpg
|footer     =Elizabeth II in 2011 wearing her Australian insignia (left) and New Zealand insignia (right)
}}
The evolution of dominions into realms resulted in [[the Crown]] having a shared and a separate character, with one [[human]] equally monarch of each state and acting as such in right of a particular realm as a distinct [[legal person]] guided only by the advice of the cabinet of that jurisdiction.<ref name=HCUK>{{cite journal |last=High Commissioner in United Kingdom |title=Royal Style and Titles |journal=Documents on Canadian External Relations > Royal Style and Titles |volume=18 |issue=2 |date=24 November 1952 |url = http://www.international.gc.ca/department/history-histoire/dcer/details-en.asp?intRefid=3498 |id=DEA/50121-B-40 |url-status=dead |archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20111123050633/http://www.international.gc.ca/department/history-histoire/dcer/details-en.asp?intRefid=3498 |archive-date=23 November 2011| df=dmy }}</ref><ref>{{cite journal| last=Smy| first=William A. | title=Royal titles and styles| journal=The Loyalist Gazette| volume=XLVI| issue=1| year=2008| url = http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_hb1372/is_1_46/ai_n29437278/| archive-url = https://archive.today/20120711172851/http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_hb1372/is_1_46/ai_n29437278/ | url-status=dead| archive-date=11 July 2012| access-date=3 January 2011 }}</ref><ref name="Toporoski">{{cite web |title=The Invisible Crown |publisher=Monarchy Canada |url = http://www.monarchist.ca/mc/invisibl.htm| author=Toporoski, Richard| access-date=20 April 2008| archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080209220704/http://www.monarchist.ca/mc/invisibl.htm |archive-date=9 February 2008 }}</ref> This means that in different contexts, the term ''Crown'' may refer to the extra-national institution associating all 15 countries, or to the Crown in each realm considered separately.{{NoteTag|One Canadian constitutional scholar, Richard Toporoski, stated on this: "I am perfectly prepared to concede, even happily affirm, that the British Crown no longer exists in Canada, but that is because legal reality indicates to me that in one sense, the British Crown no longer exists in Britain: the Crown transcends Britain just as much as it does Canada. One can therefore speak of 'the British Crown' or 'the Canadian Crown' or indeed the 'Barbadian' or 'Tuvaluan' Crown, but what one will mean by the term is the Crown acting or expressing itself within the context of that particular jurisdiction".<ref name="Toporoski"/>|name=Toporoski}} In Australia, it has been suggested that the Crown is further divided, with it possible that the monarchy in each of the states is a separate institution, equal in status to each other.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Twomey |first=Anne |author-link=Anne Twomey (academic) |date=January 2008 |title=The States, the Commonwealth and the Crown: The Battle for Sovereignty |url=https://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/Senate/Powers_practice_n_procedures/pops/pop48/battlesovereignty |access-date=12 November 2023 |website=Parliament of Australia |language=en-AU}}</ref> The monarchy is therefore no longer an exclusively British institution.<ref name="Bogdanor" /><ref name="Toporoski" /><ref name="Mallory" />

From a cultural standpoint, the sovereign's name, image and other royal symbols unique to each nation are visible in the emblems and insignia of governmental institutions and militia. Elizabeth II's effigy, for example, appears on coins and banknotes in some countries, and an oath of allegiance to the King is usually required from politicians, judges, military members and new citizens. By 1959, it was being asserted by Buckingham Palace officials that the Queen was "equally at home in all her realms".<ref>{{cite book |last=Buckner |first=Phillip |publication-date=2005 |contribution = The Last Great Royal Tour: Queen Elizabeth's 1959 Tour to Canada |editor-last=Buckner | editor-first=Phillip |title = Canada and the End of Empire |page=66 |location=Vancouver, BC |publisher=UBC Press |isbn=978-0-7748-0915-3 | url = https://books.google.com/books?id=27IggObUC9kC |access-date=24 October 2009 |year=2005 }}</ref>

{{Multiple image
|total_width=260
|perrow     =1/1
|align      =right
|image1     =King's speech 2023.jpg
|image2     =Canada speech from the throne 2025.png
|caption1   =Charles III opening a session of parliament in the United Kingdom in 2023 (top) and in Canada in 2025 (bottom)
}}

Robert Hazell and Bob Morris argued in 2017 that there are five aspects to the monarchy of the Commonwealth realms: the constitutional monarchy, including the royal prerogative and the use thereof on the advice of local ministers or according to convention or statute law; the national monarchy, comprising the functions of the head of state beyond the purely constitutional; the international monarchy, where the monarch is head of state in the 15 realms and holds the position of head of the Commonwealth; the religious monarchy, meaning the sovereign as head of the Church of England and his relationship with the Presbyterian Church of Scotland; and the welfare/service monarchy, wherein the sovereign and other members of the royal family give their patronage to charities and other elements of civil society.<ref>{{citation| url=https://www.constitutionalstudies.ca/wp-content/uploads/2022/05/22.1-Full-Issue.pdf#page=12| editor-last1=Lagassé| editor-first1=Philippe| editor-last2=MacDonald| editor-first2=Nicholas A.| title=The Crown in the 21st Century| last1=Hazell| first1=Robert| last2=Morris| first2=Bob| series=If the Queen Has No Reserve Powers Left, What Is the Modern Monarchy For?| journal=Review of Constitutional Studies| volume=22| issue=1| year=2017| page=12| publisher=Centre for Constitutional Studies| location=Edmonton| accessdate=31 May 2023}}</ref>

===Succession and regency===
To guarantee the continuity of multiple states sharing the same person as monarch, the preamble of the ''[[Statute of Westminster 1931]]'' laid out a convention that any alteration to the [[Succession to the British throne|line of succession]] in any one country must be voluntarily approved by the parliaments of all the realms.{{NoteTag|See [[Sue v Hill]].|name=SueHill}}<ref name=SOW>{{cite book |date=11 December 1931 |title=Statute of Westminster, 1931 |location=Westminster |publisher=Her Majesty's Stationery Office |id = c. 4 (U.K.) |url = http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/Geo5/22-23/4/contents |access-date=22 May 2015 }}</ref> This convention was first applied in 1936 when the British government conferred with the dominion governments during the [[Edward VIII abdication crisis]]. Prime Minister of Canada [[William Lyon Mackenzie King]] pointed out that the ''Statute of Westminster'' required Canada's request and consent to any legislation passed by the British parliament before it could become part of Canada's laws and affect the line of succession in Canada.<ref name="Twomey">{{cite AV media |people=Anne Twomey |title = Professor Anne Twomey – Succession to the Crown: foiled by Canada? |medium=Digital video |publisher=University College London |location=London |date=18 September 2014 |url= http://vimeo.com/108335929 }}</ref> Sir [[Maurice Gwyer]], [[Office of the Parliamentary Counsel (United Kingdom)|first parliamentary counsel]] in the UK, reflected this position, stating that the ''Act of Settlement'' was a part of the law in each dominion.<ref name="Twomey"/> Though today the ''Statute of Westminster'' is law only in Canada, Australia and the United Kingdom,<ref>{{citation |ssrn=1943287 | last=Twomey |first=Anne |title = Changing the Rules of Succession to the Throne |date=October 2011| pages=10–11| publisher=[[Sydney Law School]] }}</ref> the convention of approval from the other realms was reasserted by the [[Perth Agreement]] of 2011, in which all 16 realms at the time agreed in principle to change the succession rule to [[absolute primogeniture]], to remove the restriction on the monarch being married to a Catholic, and to reduce the number of members of the Royal Family who need the monarch's permission to marry. These changes came into effect on 26 March 2015. Alternatively, a Commonwealth realm may choose to cease being such by making its throne the inheritance of a different royal house or by becoming a republic, actions to which, though they alter the country's royal succession, the convention does not apply.<ref>{{harvnb|Twomey|2011|p=12}}</ref>
{{multiple image
|total_width=260
|align      =left
|image1     =Prince of Wales in Normandy 2024.jpg
|caption1   =[[William, Prince of Wales]], the present heir apparent in the Commonwealth realms
|image2     =Trooping the Colour 2023 (GovPM 41) crop 2.jpg
|caption2   =[[Prince George of Wales|Prince George]], second in the line of succession
}}

Agreement among the realms does not mean the succession laws cannot diverge. During the abdication crisis in 1936, the United Kingdom passed ''[[His Majesty's Declaration of Abdication Act 1936|His Majesty's Declaration of Abdication Act]]'' with the approval of the parliament of Australia and the governments of the remaining dominions. (Canada, New Zealand and South Africa gave parliamentary assent later.)<ref name="SydLaw">{{harvnb|Twomey|2011|p=9}}</ref> The act effected Edward's abdication in the United Kingdom on 11 December; as the Canadian government had requested and consented to the act becoming part of Canadian law, and Australia and New Zealand had then not yet adopted the ''Statute of Westminster'', the abdication took place in those countries on the same day. The parliament of South Africa passed its own legislation—''[[His Majesty King Edward the Eighth's Abdication Act, 1937]]''—which backdated the abdication there to 10 December. The Irish Free State recognised the king's abdication with the ''[[Executive Authority (External Relations) Act 1936]]'' on 12 December.<ref name=SydLaw/><ref>{{cite web| date=12 December 1936| title=Executive Authority (External Relations) Act, 1936| location=Dublin| publisher=Office of the Attorney General| id=3.2| url=http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/1936/en/act/pub/0058/sec0003.html| accessdate=6 May 2009}}</ref><ref>{{citation |chapter-url=https://books.google.com/books?id=W6Kx28VD_4MC&q=ireland+abdication+%22December+12%22&pg=RA3-PT173 |
last=Morris| first=Jan |title=Farewell the Trumpets |chapter=15 |id=Note 13 |year=2010 |publisher=Faber & Faber| location=London |isbn=9780571265985 |access-date=22 May 2015 }}</ref> According to [[Anne Twomey (academic)|Anne Twomey]], this demonstrated "the divisibility of the Crown in the personal, as well as the political, sense".<ref name=SydLaw/> For E. H. Coghill, writing as early as 1937, it proved that the convention of a common line of succession "is not of imperative force"<ref>{{cite journal| first=E. H.| last=Coghill| title=The King–Marriage and Abdication| year=1937| journal=Australian Law Journal| volume=10| issue=393| page=398}}</ref> and Kenneth John Scott asserted in 1962 that it ended the "convention that statutory uniformity on these subjects would be maintained in the parts of the Commonwealth that continued to owe allegiance to the Crown".<ref>{{cite book| first=Kenneth John| last=Scott| title=The New Zealand Constitution| url=https://archive.org/details/newzealandconsti0000scot| url-access=registration| page=[https://archive.org/details/newzealandconsti0000scot/page/68 68]| publisher=Clarendon Press| year=1962| location=London}}</ref>

Today, some realms govern succession by their own domestic laws, while others, either by written clauses in their constitution or by convention, stipulate that whoever is monarch of the United Kingdom is automatically also monarch of that realm. It is generally agreed that any unilateral alteration of succession by the UK would not have effect in all the realms.{{NoteTag|Noel Cox stated, "any alteration by the United Kingdom Parliament in the law touching the succession to the throne would, except perhaps in the case of Papua New Guinea, be ineffective to alter the succession to the throne in respect of, and in accordance with the law of, any other independent member of the Commonwealth which was within the Queen's realms at the time of such alteration. Therefore it is more than mere constitutional convention that requires that the assent of the parliament of each member of the Commonwealth within the Queen's realms be obtained in respect of any such alteration in the law."<ref>{{Citation |last=Cox |first=Noel |date=23 August 2003 |title = The Dichotomy of Legal Theory and Political Reality: The Honours Prerogative and Imperial Unity |ssrn=420752 |journal = Australian Journal of Law and Society |volume=14 |orig-year=1999 |issn=0729-3356 }}</ref>

Richard Toporoski similarly stated, "if, let us say, an alteration were to be made in the United Kingdom to the Act of Settlement 1701, providing for the succession of the Crown. It is my opinion that the domestic constitutional law of Australia or Papua New Guinea, for example, would provide for the succession in those countries of the same person who became Sovereign of the United Kingdom ... If the British law were to be changed and we [Canada] did not change our law ... the Crown would be divided. The person provided for in the new law would become king or queen in at least some realms of the Commonwealth; Canada would continue on with the person who would have become monarch under the previous law ...<ref name="Topo">{{cite journal |last=Toporoski |first=Richard |title = The Invisible Crown |journal=Monarchy Canada |issue=Summer 1998 |year=1988 |url = http://www.monarchist.ca/mc/invisibl.htm |access-date=21 May 2015 |url-status=dead |archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/19970617074036/http://www.monarchist.ca/mc/invisibl.htm |archive-date=17 June 1997 }}</ref>|name=Cox}}

Following the accession of [[George VI]] to the throne, the United Kingdom created [[Regency Act 1937|legislation that provided for a regency]] if the monarch was not of age or incapacitated. During debate that law, Sir [[John Simon, 1st Viscount Simon|John Simon]] opined that each Dominion would have to decide if it needed to legislate with respect to a regency; though, such legislation would not be required until the occasion arose. This was because the governors-general could still perform viceregal functions during a regency in Britain, including giving royal assent to any Dominion law giving effect to a regency in that Dominion. In the United Kingdom, on the other hand, legislation was needed in advance because, otherwise, there would be no one to give assent to a regency law if the sovereign were incapacitated.<ref>{{citation| url=https://www.constitutionalstudies.ca/wp-content/uploads/2022/05/22.1-Full-Issue.pdf#page=50| editor-last1=Lagassé| editor-first1=Philippe| editor-last2=MacDonald| editor-first2=Nicholas A.| title=The Crown in the 21st Century| last1=Twomey| first1=Anne| series=Royal Succession, Abdication, and Regency in the Realms| journal=Review of Constitutional Studies| volume=22| issue=1| year=2017| page=50| publisher=Centre for Constitutional Studies| location=Edmonton| accessdate=4 June 2023}}</ref> Though input was sought from the Dominions on the matter, all declined to make themselves bound by the British legislation, agreeing with Simon.<ref>{{cite book| last=Mallory| first=J. R.| title=The Structure and Function of Canadian Government| publisher=Gage| year=1984| location=Toronto| pages=36–37| edition=2nd}}</ref> Tuvalu later incorporated this principle into [[Constitution of Tuvalu|its constitution]].<ref>{{citation| url=http://www.paclii.org/tv/legis/consol_act/cot277/| title=Constitution of Tuvalu| section=Section 58(1)| no-pp=y| location=Funafuti| year=1978| publisher=Pacific Islands Legal Information Institute| access-date=25 May 2015}}</ref> New Zealand included in its ''[[Constitution Act 1986]]'' a clause specifying that, should a regent be installed in the United Kingdom, that individual would carry out the functions of the monarch of New Zealand.<ref>{{Citation| author=Elizabeth II| date=13 December 1986| title=Constitution Act, 1986| series=4.1| location=Wellington| publisher=New Zealand Government| url=http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/1986/0114/latest/whole.html#dlm94204| accessdate=22 May 2015}}</ref>

===Monarch===
[[File:RoyalVisitSenate.jpg|thumb|King [[George VI]], with [[Queen Elizabeth The Queen Mother|Queen Elizabeth]], grants [[royal assent]] to bills in the [[Senate of Canada]], May 1939.]]

The sovereign resides in the oldest realm, the United Kingdom. The king appoints [[viceroy]]s to perform most of the constitutional and ceremonial duties on his behalf in the other realms: in each, a [[governor-general]] as his personal national representative, as well as a [[Lieutenant Governor (Canada)|lieutenant governor]] as his representative in each of the Canadian provinces and [[Governors of the Australian states|governor]] as his representative in each of the [[Australian states]]. These appointments are made on the advice of the prime minister of the country or the premier of the province or state concerned, though this process may have additional requirements.{{NoteTag|In [[Governor-General of Papua New Guinea|Papua New Guinea]] and [[Governor-General of Solomon Islands|Solomon Islands]], the governor-general is elected by the national legislature. In [[Governor-General of Tuvalu|Tuvalu]], the prime minister must consult the legislature in confidence prior to nominating a candidate.|name=Viceroy}} The extent to which specific additional powers are reserved exclusively for the monarch varies from realm to realm. On occasions of national importance, the King may be advised to perform in person his constitutional duties, such as granting [[royal assent]] or issuing a [[royal proclamation]]. Otherwise, all royal powers, including the [[royal prerogative]], are carried out on behalf of the sovereign by the relevant viceroy. In the United Kingdom, the king appoints [[Counsellors of State]] to perform his constitutional duties in his absence.

Similarly, the monarch will perform ceremonial duties in the Commonwealth realms to mark historically significant events.<ref>{{cite web |url = http://www.royal.gov.uk/ThecurrentRoyalFamily/Overview.aspx |publisher=Royal Household |title=The current Royal Family |access-date=2 July 2009 |url-status=dead |archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20090710092956/http://www.royal.gov.uk/ThecurrentRoyalFamily/Overview.aspx |archive-date=10 July 2009 }}</ref> Citizens in Commonwealth realms may request birthday or wedding anniversary messages to be sent from the sovereign. This is available for 100th, 105th and beyond for birthdays; and 60th ("Diamond"), 65th, 70th ("Platinum") and beyond for wedding anniversaries.<ref>{{cite web |url = http://www.royal.gov.uk/HMTheQueen/Queenandanniversarymessages/Whoisentitled.aspx |publisher=Royal Household |title=Queen and anniversary messages&nbsp;– Who is entitled? |access-date=22 February 2011 |url-status=dead |archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20101204005418/https://www.royal.gov.uk/HMTheQueen/Queenandanniversarymessages/Whoisentitled.aspx |archive-date=4 December 2010 }}</ref>

====Religion====
It is only in [[England]] and [[Scotland]] that the King plays a role in organised religion.

In England he acts as the [[Supreme Governor of the Church of England]] and nominally appoints its bishops and archbishops. In Scotland, he is a member of the [[Church of Scotland]] and swears an oath to uphold and protect the Church of Scotland. He also sends a [[Lord High Commissioner to the General Assembly of the Church of Scotland|Lord High Commissioner]] as his representative to meetings of the [[General Assembly of the Church of Scotland|church's General Assembly]], when he is not personally in attendance.<ref>{{cite web |url = http://www.royal.gov.uk/output/Page4709.asp |title = The Monarchy Today > Queen and State > Queen and Church > Queen and Church of Scotland |publisher=Royal Household |access-date=25 October 2008 |url-status=dead |archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20081028202032/http://www.royal.gov.uk/output/Page4709.asp |archive-date=28 October 2008 }}</ref>