Britain’s Queen Elizabeth has missed more than one important royal commitment in recent months due to health problems, but royal experts say no retirement is planned.
Women and home Reporter Emma Duni spoke with some royal experts as well as constitutional experts to better explain why the Queen could not simply withdraw completely from public life and give way to her son, Prince Charles.
As the queen has now missed major royal commitments, including the state opening of parliament on May 10, many have suggested that the 96-year-old monarch should step down, but experts say that is not possible in practice.
According to Duni: “If the Queen wants to transfer her powers to the Prince of Wales without having to abdicate, a ‘regency’ will have to take place. However, this would not have happened without some difficult negotiations between five key players in the British monarchy.
This was further explained by constitutional expert Prof. Vernon Bogdanor, who said: “The regency requires three of the five dignitaries, the Prince of Wales, the Lord Chancellor, the Mayor, the Chief Justice and the Lord of the Rings, to certify that the Queen is permanently – permanently – unable to perform its duties.
“This assessment will no doubt be made on the advice of a doctor. There is no evidence that this is so … The criterion is objective. The queen can’t just say, “I can’t do my duty.” A voluntary decision she could make in theory is abdication, “he added.
However, the abdication is also not on the cards for Queen Elizabeth, who according to the royal historian Hugo Vickers believes that this is against the pact she made with God when she ascended the throne in 1953.
The guardian Vickers quotes: “She is an anointed queen. And if you are an anointed queen, you do not abdicate. “
Add Comment