“Nothing suggests an abdication is in the works,” says UK specialist

The announcement caused a shock in the United Kingdom, particularly in the British press. The King of England Charles III is suffering from cancer, Buckingham Palace announced in a press release. A communication to prepare a future abdication of the king? Not so sure, according to Christophe Gillissen, professor of Irish studies and British civilization at the University of Caen. According to the first elements, the specialist from the United Kingdom believes that nothing prevents Charles III from remaining king while he is being treated. Above all, it underlines the unprecedented nature of this communication which is part of the desire for transparency of royalty desired by the British sovereign.

franceinfo: Will this announcement of Charles III’s cancer lead to the king’s abdication?

Christophe Gillissen: For the moment, we don’t know. Maybe the king or maybe his doctor knows. But the public, journalists, even specialists in the British political system do not currently have enough information. It should be noted that there was a certain transparency in the announcement that was made compared to what was practiced previously. But this transparency has its limits. It is known that he is suffering from a form of cancer, and while this remains rather vague – and the palace’s declaration message is marked with the seal of optimism – the king hopes to soon resume his functions fully. The British Prime Minister indicated that the diagnosis was detected “early” and therefore that there is hope. If we are to believe his comments, there is currently no particular seriousness which would suggest that an abdication is in preparation.

In what cases can an abdication happen?

We are entering a gray area of ​​the British Constitution which itself is basically quite vague. There can be an abdication if the king decides. It’s that simple. This is obviously extremely rare.

“In general, in the royal house of the United Kingdom, unlike some royal families in Europe, monarchs stay until the end. We saw this in particular with Elizabeth II who fulfilled her duties until her last hour. “

Christophe Gillissen, professor at the University of Caen

at franceinfo

You have to go back to 1936 to find a case of application in the United Kingdom, but these were very specific circumstances which had nothing to do with the illness or health of the monarch. The new King Edward VIII wanted to marry a divorced woman, which posed a problem since the British monarch is head of the Anglican Church, which allowed divorce but did not allow divorcees to remarry. There was quite a controversy and after a somewhat heated exchange with the Prime Minister at the time, Edward VIII preferred to abdicate in order to be able to marry Wallis Simpson.

Can Charles III be king and cure cancer at the same time?

This is what will begin, it seems. Charles III indicates that he will continue to have his weekly meetings with the Prime Minister. He indicates that he will continue to consult the dispatches, documents and reports sent to him. Obviously, he will have to scale back for everything that involves ceremonies, inaugurations or state visits. But that is not necessarily a problem since this task can be fulfilled by other members of the royal family. We obviously think of William, the Prince of Wales, who is first in the line of succession. It could also be Queen Camilla. So yes, it is possible.

Are there enough people in the royal family for him to be replaced?

At the moment it’s a bit complicated because the royal family, and the number of people in the family who had a British state budget to carry out ceremonial functions and so on. , has been greatly reduced. A way of showing that the royal family was not too expensive. And for some time now, there has been Prince Andrew who is no longer able to carry out official functions, because he is disturbed by a certain number of scandals and therefore he remains as discreet as possible. He was stripped of certain titles by Elizabeth II. Likewise, Prince Harry chose exile. There aren’t many people left. Especially since the Princess of Wales was hospitalized at the same time as the King and is therefore not available. At the moment, the ranks are somewhat thinned out for him.

Would an abdication be a catastrophe for the royal family, just after the death of Elizabeth II?

This would be a delicate situation that would need to be handled with caution. But I don’t know if it would necessarily be a disaster. We know, according to polls, that Prince William is much more popular than his father. So, if the king were to abdicate, it could perhaps even be a good thing from that point of view. That would be a lot of succession in a short time. Would Prince William be ready? He has the experience and has been trained, he would be able to do it.

“I believe that King Charles III will remain on the throne for as long as he feels he is able to do so.”

Christophe Gillissen, professor at the University of Caen

at franceinfo

Can you remind us of the order of succession?

First in order is Prince William, the king’s eldest son. Next, these are William’s children in the order of their birth. Note that for the past ten years, sons have no longer had priority over daughters. The law was changed because public opinion would not understand that a son younger than a sister could take precedence over her. After Prince William’s three children, it’s Prince Harry, and then it’s Prince Harry’s children. Afterwards, this line continues for a long time, but the probability that we will go further is still very slim.

Prince Harry has also decided to visit his father. This conflicting relationship with this son who left for the other side of the Atlantic and who published memoirs is still a thorn in the side of the king. He did everything to try to reconcile the two brothers and then reconcile with his son. At a time like this, is this visit likely to change the nature of the relationship between the King and Prince Harry? I don’t know.

Is this communication from Buckingham Palace still unprecedented?

This is all decided in a very small circle so it’s guesses and hypotheses but we see quite clearly that when he was prince, Charles had decades to think about how he was going to rule. He understood that his mother, Elizabeth II, had struggled to keep pace with social change. His style of reign had obviously evolved, but remained a little old-fashioned.

“Charles III wants to project a more modern image and one more in tune with British society. This was very visible during his coronation. I believe this includes a certain transparency, but within reasonable limits.”

Christophe Gillissen, professor at the University of Caen

at franceinfo

There is the desire to reveal more of the feelings and experiences of the royal family. Elizabeth II always respected protocol to the letter. She did it with talent and a smile, but she very rarely talked about what she herself might be feeling. There is an exception when, in 1992, there was a whole series of difficulties which befell the royal family, from the fire of Windsor Castle to the divorce of its children. King Charles III shows during the coronation and during this announcement of his illness that there is the king, but that there is also a human being who does not hesitate to share some information. I believe that he is aware that the monarchy is fragile today, that its future is not necessarily guaranteed, that for this monarchy to be able to maintain itself, a new type of relationship must be established with the British population. And so he decided to opt for this transparency which remains relative, of course.

Has this form of communication become necessary today?

I tend to think that this strategy is indeed wise. That is to say, Elizabeth II had her way of doing things, but she had been doing it for decades. The British population accepted her as she was and were not going to expect her to change, even if there were some slightly complicated moments. At the time, for example, of the death of Princess Diana. King Charles III is still less popular. A certain number of British people think that he is a little haughty, that he does not have the same naturalness as his mother. If he kept a comparable distance, I think things would go badly.

It is unlikely that the British will embark on the task of transforming a kingdom into a republic because it takes a long time. This raises a multitude of problems. It would have a huge impact on the Commonwealth. This is a major constitutional project. No government would embark on this without excellent reasons. But despite everything, the monarchy is maintained as long as a majority of the population is in favor of it. So we must cultivate this image, this relationship with the British and respond to their requests. I believe that this is the strategy of modernization and transparency that we are seeing at the moment. And for my part, I tend to think that this is rather well seen. It is certainly necessary.