Myths about the Monarchy

The head of state of Grenada is the King of Grenada, not the King of Britain. These two positions are two totally legally separate and distinct posts. While both positions are held by the same man, Charles III, in all aspects relating to Grenada he is solely and exclusively King of Grenada, and his separate position as King of Britain is irrelevant. In his exercise of his position as Grenada’s head of state he is bound by the Grenadian constitution and Grenadian law, with British law or the British government having no say or authority in any Grenadian matter. In legal terms, King Charles III of Grenada and King Charles III of Britain are two different people. To say that Grenada has the British monarch as head of state is as inaccurate as saying that Grenada has the Canadian monarch as head of state, or that Britain has the Saint Lucian monarch as head of state.

The Monarchy of Grenada and the Monarchy of Britain are two separate and independent institutions. After independence in 1974, all colonial ties were severed and Britain no longer has any power or authority over Grenada. The monarchy is not a colonial relic, but rather our own independent, endemic system of government, which we freely chose to keep and incorporate into our constitution after independence.

The King, per definition, is not a foreigner, but a Grenadian. All Grenadian passports and citizenships are issued on behalf and in the name of the King. As King of Grenada, the king is the living embodiment of the Grenadian state and is therefore a Grenadian citizen. In a pluralistic society such as Grenada, with our rich tapestry of ancestry, skin colour or ethnicity does not play a role in determining whether or not you are Grenadian.

According to the Democracy Index in 2022, of the top 10 most democratic states in the world, 5 are monarchies. This is despite the fact that only 1/5 of the world’s countries are monarchies. Meanwhile, all 10 of the world’s least democratic states are republics. Monarchies thereby majorly outperform republics in term of democracy. Any Grenadian can aspire to and become Governor-General, the representative of the King, who carries out almost all the duties and functions of Grenada’s head of state on a day-to-day basis, meaning that any Grenadian already is able to effectively become our head of state.

There is nothing inherently outdated about the monarchy. Monarchies have existed for thousands of years yes, but so have republics. They are both ancient forms of government. Stating the current year we are in is no more an argument than stating that the sky is blue. Monarchies majorly outperform republics in numerous metrics; from democracy to human development. A form of government which has existed, survived, adapted and thrived for thousands of years and in our present day can hardly be considered outdated.

Grenadian taxpayers do not pay a single cent to the King or royal family. The King receives no salary for being Grenada’s head of state. As such, the king and members of the royal family volunteer all the time they use in and working for Grenada, without any pay. The only costs of the monarchy are paying the salary of the Governor-General, and for the staff of the Governor-General’s office. Even in a republic, such as Trinidad or Barbados, these same exact costs remain, but are instead incurred by the President.

As we have extensively laid out here, this is not the case. The Crown in fact has and carries out a large number of very important constitutional duties and functions. The Monarchy is an important part of our constitutional framework, providing a nonpartisan and independent symbol of the state above our politicians, as well as an independent and nonpartisan guardian of the constitution and rule of law. The Crown’s reserve powers can be vital in a time of crisis and instability, and must be wielded without partisanship.

Grenada became truly independent in 1974. The monarchy does not make us in any way dependent on Britain. As explained earlier, the King’s position as King of Grenada is completely separate from his position as King of Britain. Becoming a republic would make us no more independent.

The King, under article 19 of the constitution, is the only person who can appoint the Governor-General, not the Prime Minister. By convention the King appoints a Governor-General after receiving advice from the Prime Minister, but this is not a legal requirement. The King can reject a Prime Minister’s advice in regards to the appointment or dismissal of a Governor-General.

The monarchy has a long history of opposing racism, dating back to King George III. In fact, the monarchy has often been a pioneer in terms of anti-racism.

King George III, the King’s 5x great grandfather, wrote an impassioned essay in 1755 called Of laws relative to government in general, where he referred to slavery as “equally repugnant to the Civil Law as to the Law of Nature”. He additionally wrote that “the very reasons used for [slavery] will be perhaps sufficient to make us hold this practice in execration”. At the time, this was by far the most anti-slavery paper published in Europe.

The King’s 3x great grandmother Queen Victoria and her husband Prince Albert were fervent opponents of slavery and the slave trade in the early 1800s, as prominent patrons of the anti-slavery movement. Queen Victoria invited former slaves, such as Samuel Crowther, to Buckingham Palace as early as 1851, to great controversy. The Queen would later informally adopt Sara Forbes Bonetta, an orphaned freed slave girl from modern-day Nigeria, funding her education and serving as godmother to her daughter.

During the First World War, British government and military officials refused to allow the formation of the British West Indies Regiment, a regiment of mostly black volunteers from the Caribbean, including Grenada. It was only due to the personal intervention of King George V, Queen Elizabeth II’s grandfather, who demanded that West Indians be allowed the same rights as Brits, that the regiment was formed. The King personally gave the regiment the prestigious right to use the royal crown on its emblem.

During the 1965 Rhodesia crisis, Queen Elizabeth II announced the dismissal of the white minority Smith government in Rhodesia when they declared independence to preserve white minority rule. She subsequently refused to recognise the white minority government’s declaration that she was Queen of Rhodesia, insisting that Rhodesia must introduce majority rule. She was was further instrumental during the 1980s in pressuring the Thatcher government in Britain to join Commonwealth sanctions against the Apartheid regime in South Africa. The Queen was additionally a major supporter of the rights of British colonies, such as Grenada, to independence and decolonisation.

King Charles III has so far in his reign gone to lengths to include multi-racial representation in his coronation, and is actively supporting research into what role the monarchy played in the slave trade. During his 2021 visit to Barbados, he lamented “the appalling atrocity of slavery, which forever stains our history”.

The King has no power to formally apologise for slavery on behalf of the UK. The King is a constitutional monarch in Britain, just as in Grenada, and as such cannot take policy decisions like that. He must follow the advice of his ministers. The current British government is against an apology, and as such the King does not have the authority to give one in his capacity as King of the UK, no matter what his personal views and opinions are.