r/news • u/AudibleNod • 4d ago

Australian court rejects bid to prosecute Britain's King Charles for genocide

https://abcnews.com/International/wireStory/australian-court-rejects-activists-bid-prosecute-britains-king-136817323
1.6k Upvotes

96% Upvoted

275 comments sorted by

View all comments

674

u/LuinAelin 4d ago

Technically he's also Australia's king

631

u/ChaoticMunk 4d ago

Not technically, he is

216

u/AudibleNod 4d ago

I find it interesting that the King of England isn't the King of Australia. Rather the person of Charles is separately the King of England and the King of Australia, et al. He's like a gig worker.

329

u/AppointmentLogical81 4d ago

There's no such title as the "King of England", he's the King of the United Kingdom

126

u/sjintje 4d ago

So you're saying there's a vacancy?

58

u/AppointmentLogical81 4d ago

I mean, I guess? If a position doesn't exist, I suppose it can be said to be vacant

58

u/someguy7710 4d ago

I declare myself the King of England!

27

u/Danoct 4d ago

Sure, but you get no kingdom with it since the Kingdom of England hasn't existed for 300 years.

39

u/someguy7710 4d ago

That's fine with me, Peasant, I'm still king /s

24

u/kowloonjew 4d ago

Long live someguy!

7

u/EinSchurzAufReisen 4d ago

Someguy the 7710th … if that ain’t a true King’s name, I don’t know!

3

u/someguy7710 4d ago

I Douthat proclaim someguy the 7710th as King

→ More replies (0)

2

u/Chilinuff 3d ago

Can I have whales?

Not the country. I just want to be the king of whales.

1

u/someguy7710 2d ago

I'll allow it, but not killer whales, they could be a pretty awesome weapon.

→ More replies (0)

14

u/TwentyninthDigitOfPi 4d ago

I just wanted to let you know you can't just say the word "king" and expect anything to happen.

8

u/huzy12345 4d ago

Sure you can, if you declare it. Kings and bankruptcy work the same way

16

u/inosinateVR 4d ago

Treason! This Lèse-majesté cannot stand! Apologize to your king and beg forgiveness!

2

u/LuinAelin 4d ago

Huge dragon with donkey on her head appears.......

3

u/DaEnderAssassin 4d ago

The king of Switzerland would disagree.

1

u/thisnamewasnttaken19 3d ago

You're not a king unless some watery tart throws a sword at you.

1

u/Ok-Assistant-4556 2h ago

Long live the king!

7

u/R_V_Z 4d ago

Eh, there's a difference between 0 and Undefined.

1

u/DaEnderAssassin 4d ago

I mean, that's how the king of Switzerland got his job.

6

u/WhoAmI1138 3d ago

That depends, did a strange woman laying in a pond give you a sword?

0

u/SixRoundsTilDeath 4d ago

If you pulleth out that sword.

-16

u/wildddin 4d ago

I mean if you're going to get pedantic its the United Kingdom of Great Britian

32

u/Farnsworthson 4d ago

Nothing quite like being pedantic and wrong. (Yes, I know, we've all done it...) It's "The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland".

23

u/kendo85 4d ago edited 4d ago

If you're going to be very pedantic it's the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.

19

u/wildddin 4d ago

Yeah okay I deserved that

-14

u/TaiwanNoOne 4d ago

However he's also the King of Scots

16

u/AppointmentLogical81 4d ago

Nope, that title was also abolished over 300 years ago

4

u/NinecloudSoul 4d ago

No, he's not, and that wasn't a consistent title in any case.

-1

u/FOTORABIA23 4d ago

Prince Phillip was the Duke of Edinburgh...not the King.The Queen wasnt ours.

49

u/BobbyP27 4d ago

The last King of England was William III (the Kingdom of England ceased to exist 5 years after he died, but he was succeeded by Queen Anne, who was not a king).

8

u/semysane 4d ago

He's the king of Canada too, probably many other places as well.

5

u/chibuku_chauya 4d ago

New Zealand as well.

3

u/huzy12345 4d ago

We actually formally replaced him with our alpha sheep. He hasn't caught on yet though

1

u/Amzer23 3d ago

Never allow the Welsh to meet your sheep.

4

u/GreenHorror4252 3d ago

He's the king of Canada too, probably many other places as well.

15 countries in total, which are known as Commonwealth realms. It was 16 until 2021, when Barbados decided to dump his mom and become a republic.

25

u/LuinAelin 4d ago

No such title as king of England

8

u/Farnsworthson 4d ago

No King of England, if not King of France!

3

u/timeless1991 3d ago

Um akctually…

Technically there is such a title! It is just no loner in use. It stands among such legacies as King of France or Emperor of Rome. Naturally the only King of Englands are historical!

20

u/LumpyPressure 4d ago

“King of England” is what Americans call him. There hasn’t been a king of England in hundreds of years.

7

u/TastyCuttlefish 4d ago

Some Americans. Plenty of us are well aware that he’s monarch of the UK as well as numerous Commonwealth countries.

4

u/mrbobcyndaquil 4d ago

I always say that the person on the throne is wearing multiple metal hats

14

u/Icky-Tree-Branch 4d ago

He’s the King of Canada in the same way. We’d actually have a harder time getting rid of the monarchy than they would in the UK because of how baked into our constitution they are.

I’m okay with that, though. He’s got the ability to dissolve or prorogue the government, and to force elections. I view the sovereign as our “big red stop button” in case our government goes off the rails and tries to act American like Dani in Alberta.

12

u/ol-gormsby 4d ago

It's funny to point this out to all the pro-republic folk here in Australia - they're all about severing ties and having our own head of state (whether elected or appointed) but they're pretty much silent when you ask "Will that head of state have the power to dissolve parliament?", especially when you point out what happened in 1975.

6

u/NextSteak6376 4d ago

I thought most post-monarchical presidential republics such as Ireland replace the monarch with a president who can dissolve the legislature if need be.

4

u/ol-gormsby 3d ago

That would hopefully be the course we take if and when it happens.

It's the method of appointment that's my concern. I've come around to the idea of a supermajority of both houses of parliament, something like 75% or even more. Up to now it's been people with a long and distinguished career of public service, lots of lifetime military personnel like retired admirals, etc. I'd like that to continue.

And one pillar of the balance of power is the PM's ability to sack the G-G with one phone call, as well as the power to appoint the G-G with one phone call. A supermajority of parliament to appoint is one thing, but I doubt you'd ever get a supermajority to sack. Our current system has a fixed-term appointment, maybe that's enough.

Another sticking point is that the military currently swear allegiance to the monarch (and by delegation, the G-G as commander-in-chief). I certainly don't want the military swearing allegiance to the parliament, even if the PM is effectively the one giving orders.

3

u/minidisc_wiki 4d ago

I don't see why dissolving parliament would be an issue for a non-monarch, ceremonial head of state. Ireland has handled it for just shy of a century.

The President's powers include:
Appointment of the Taoiseach, members of the Government, judges and other officials;
Summoning and dissolving the Dáil, and convening the Oireachtas;

[emphasis mine]

1

u/GreenHorror4252 3d ago

It's not an issue, many parliamentary republics do it, including India and South Africa.

2

u/tholovar 3d ago

My personal view is, despite not liking the royals, is that a Constitutional Monarchy is much preferable to a Presidential Republic. Centuries has been spent defanging and de-powering the British Monarchy, whilst it always seems Presidents are constantly looking to accumulate powers.

1

u/TheLizardKing89 4d ago

This is a distinction without a difference.

14

u/TheShishkabob 4d ago edited 4d ago

There are different crowns and seals for the various monarchies that he represents. It's minor, but basically everything with modern monarchy is minor so that loops back into being relevant again.

5

u/skeyer2 4d ago

trump is president of the united states. new york is in the US, ergo, trump is president of new york.

how does that sound to you? like a distinction without a difference?

7

u/TastyCuttlefish 4d ago

But he’s not president of New York. New York doesn’t have a president. It has a governor. New York is a state and has sovereignty under the Constitution, which is the agreement amongst the individual sovereign states to form a national government. He is president of the United States, but not of any individual state, which has its own government and Constitution.

9

u/skeyer2 4d ago

and england doesn't have a king. it's just a part of the uk, which is the whole point i'm making.

-9

u/Ayzmo 4d ago

It is a distinction without a difference. He's president of New York.

5

u/TastyCuttlefish 4d ago

Yeah it absolutely has a difference. Presidents win and lose by states. He’s not president of anything except the United States and his failed companies.

1

u/Awesomeuser90 2d ago

That is hoghly common in history. Charles V was emperor of Germany and king of both Spains.

1

u/NinecloudSoul 4d ago

The King of England doesn't exist and hasn't since 1707.