For a constitutionalist, the death of a monarch is an unimportant event. Like any head of state other than in presidential regimes, his primary role is to embody the continuity of government, regardless of the ministerial team in power.
Posted at 1:00 p.m.
And, in the case of the Queen of Canada, this continuity manifests itself in an automatic and surprisingly rapid succession: by the simple death of his mother, Charles became king. His confirmation will be done soon. His coronation will take place later and concerns rather the symbolic and emotional aspect of the monarchy.
This affective side interests me for personal reasons. In order to obtain Canadian citizenship, I had to pledge loyalty and allegiance to the Queen. After my marriage, she was the second woman to whom I extended this favor. So, a short moment of reflection is in order. Short, because I assume that the commitments in my oath are transferred to the successor.
But as an immigrant, I had other monarchs imposed on me by a constitutional system. Juliana was Queen of the Netherlands when I was born. His daughter Beatrix succeeded him and now it is Willem-Alexander who is the first king of the country since the XIXe century. So I have experience with royal estates and can compare.
Let’s not forget that the Netherlands was one of the first republics after antiquity. The dominant Protestant belief has created a deep sense of equality there; the country’s history has established a strong desire for independence there.
So the establishment of the monarchy 200 years ago in reaction to the democratic values of the French Revolution was risky. But Juliana’s prudence and wisdom and Beatrix’s iron will to modernize the monarchy in a society that was undergoing dramatic changes enabled the family of Orange-Nassau to regain popularity.
At the same time, national pride regained the upper hand, in times of economic and… sporting success: in particular speed skating and soccer enabled the Dutch to dress in orange and become royalist republicans!
Willem-Alexander, rather weak in terms of political will and judgment in his personal life, chose a charming wife. Becoming the queen, Maxima helped seal the popularity of the royal family. Therefore, the evolution of the institution of the monarchy contributed to the emancipation of the country, which had become decidedly modern.
This has not been the case in Canada. The symbolic presence, sometimes warm, sometimes rather distant, of the royal family was just that.
Apart from a few formalities, the intervention of the monarch of London remains limited to the strict minimum. The attachment of Canadians to the monarchy concerns rather the tradition and the motherland of what has become a minority of Canadians.
It is certain that the style of Elizabeth II ensured that the monarchy followed the very slow evolution of English society (and, to a lesser extent, that of the other countries of the United Kingdom). She maneuvered with tact towards her successive prime ministers, exercising the rights that Walter Bagehot attributed to the sovereign in a constitutional monarchy, to be consulted, to encourage and to warn.
She did it with discretion, without making waves, as it should. She chose not to deny Boris Johnson his request to prorogue the House of Commons. A mistake, as we learned later.
Some will say that it was rather Charles who inherited from us and that we had no choice. Of course, we have the choice of choosing another institution as head of state, for example a governor chosen by the government in place.
This largely corresponds to the current situation in Canada, where the governor general actually exercises the powers of the monarch. Or a president-elect with little or no political powers, as in Germany. The difference with a monarchy is limited, apart from the hint of colonialist and elitist smell of the latter, not to mention the slavery past which undoubtedly inspired Barbados to jettison the monarchy.
Finally, there is the presidential system found in France and the United States. Beware what you wish for, you might get a Trump or a Le Penespecially with our method of electing majority governments that only get a minority of the votes.
In the meantime, long live the king!