The Constitutionality of the Religious Tests Governing the Royal Succession – Australian and Canadian Perspectives

Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II is queen of 16 independent nations (sometimes referred to as ‘Commonwealth Realms’). Following a process of legal and political evolution Australia and Canada became independent sovereign states, with the result that modern constitutional and political reality means that the positions of Queen of the United Kingdom, Queen of Australia, Queen of Canada and so on are distinct legal offices, albeit currently (although not necessarily) occupied by the same individual. It is well know that, by (British) law, the monarch cannot be a Roman Catholic and must be a Protestant in communion with the Church of England and that at his or her accession and coronation must swear a number of religious oaths and participate in various religious ceremonies. The political scientist Norman Bonney in Monarchy, Religion and the State: Civil Religion in the United Kingdom, Canada, Australia and the Commonwealth (Manchester University Press, 2013) argues that in anticipation of the death of The Queen the Commonwealth Realms should engage in national debates to determine whether the traditional rituals which require professions of Christianity and Protestantism by the new monarch continue to be appropriate, or whether they might be replaced by alternative secular or interfaith ceremonies given the secular constitutional systems and multicultural makeup of the Commonwealth Realms. This paper argues that Bonney’s argument for debates as to the appropriateness of the religious elements of the monarchy is legally redundant. The constitutional systems of many of the Commonwealth Realms – including Australia and Canada – prohibit religious discrimination and religious tests for the holding of public offices. Any such test is unconstitutional and therefore void. This paper explores whether the religious tests governing the royal succession are invalid under the constitutional law of Australia and Canada and the legal and political consequences of any such invalidity.