Royal assent
thumb|King George VI, accompanied by Queen Elizabeth, grants royal assent to laws in the Canadian Senate, 19 May 1939

Royal assent is the method by which a monarch formally approves an act of the legislature (either directly, or through an official acting on the monarch's behalf). In some jurisdictions, royal assent is equivalent to promulgation, while in others that is a separate step. Under a modern constitutional monarchy royal assent is considered to be little more than a formality; even in those nations which still, in theory, permit the Monarch to withhold assent to laws (such as the United Kingdom, Norway, and Liechtenstein), the Monarch almost never does so, except in a dire political emergency or upon the advice of their government. While the power to veto a law by withholding royal assent was once exercised often by European monarchs, such an occurrence has been very rare since the eighteenth century.

Royal assent is sometimes associated with elaborate ceremonies. In the United Kingdom, for instance, the Sovereign may appear personally in the House of Lords or may appoint Lords Commissioners, who announce that royal assent has been granted at a ceremony held at the Palace of Westminster for this purpose. However, royal assent is usually granted less ceremonially by letters patent. In other nations, such as Australia, the governor-general (as the Monarch's representative) merely signs a bill. In Canada, the governor general may give assent either in person at a ceremony held in the Senate or by a written declaration notifying parliament of their agreement to the bill.

United Kingdom

Before the Royal Assent by Commission Act 1541 became law, assent was always required to be given by the Sovereign in person before Parliament.

The last time royal assent was given by the Sovereign in person in Parliament was in the reign of Queen Victoria at a prorogation on 12 August 1854.

The Act was repealed and replaced by the Royal Assent Act 1967. However section 1(2) of that Act does not prevent the Sovereign from declaring assent in person if he or she so desires.

Royal assent is the final step required for a parliamentary bill to become law. Once a bill is presented to the Sovereign or the Sovereign's representative, he or she has the following formal options:
 the Sovereign may grant royal assent, thereby making the bill an Act of Parliament.
 the Sovereign may delay the bill's assent through the use of his or her reserve powers, thereby vetoing the bill.
 the Sovereign may refuse royal assent on the advice of his or her ministers.

The last bill that was refused assent by the Sovereign was the Scottish Militia Bill during Queen Anne's reign in 1708.Lords' Journals (1705–1709) p. 506

Erskine May's Parliamentary Practice advises "...and from that sanction they cannot be legally withheld", meaning that bills must be sent for royal assent, not that it must be given., citing Hats. p. 339, 13 Lords' Journals, p. 756 However, some authorities have stated that the Sovereign no longer has the power to withhold assent from a bill against the advice of ministers.Gilbert Burnet, A History of my Own Time, vol. II (1734), p. 274.

Under modern constitutional conventions, the Sovereign generally acts on, and in accordance with, the advice of his or her ministers. However, there is some disagreement among scholars as to whether the monarch should withhold royal assent to a bill if advised to do so by her ministers. Since these ministers most often enjoy the support of Parliament and obtain the passage of bills, it is improbable that they would advise the Sovereign to withhold assent. Hence, in modern practice, the issue has never arisen, and royal assent has not been withheld.

Historical development

Originally, legislative power was exercised by the Sovereign acting on the advice of the Curia regis, or Royal Council, in which important magnates and clerics participated and which evolved into Parliament. In 1265, the Earl of Leicester irregularly called a full parliament without royal authorisation. Membership of the so-called Model Parliament, established in 1295 under Edward I, eventually came to be divided into two branches: bishops, abbots, earls, and barons formed the House of Lords, while the two knights from each shire and two burgesses from each borough led the House of Commons. The King would seek the advice and consent of both houses before making any law. During Henry VI's reign, it became regular practice for the two houses to originate legislation in the form of bills, which would not become law unless the Sovereign's assent was obtained, as the Sovereign was, and still remains, the enactor of laws. Hence, all Acts include the clause "Be it enacted by the Queen's (King's) most Excellent Majesty, by and with the advice and consent of the Lords Spiritual and Temporal, and Commons, in this present Parliament assembled, and by the authority of the same, as follows...". The Parliament Acts 1911 and 1949 provide a second potential preamble if the House of Lords were to be excluded from the process.

The power of Parliament to pass bills was often thwarted by monarchs. Charles I dissolved Parliament in 1629, after it passed motions and bills critical of—and seeking to restrict—his arbitrary exercise of power. During the eleven years of personal rule that followed, Charles performed legally dubious actions such as raising taxes without Parliament's approval."Charles I (r. 1625–49)". Royal Household at Buckingham Palace. Retrieved 12 April 2007. 

The form of the Coronation Oath taken by monarchs up to and including James I and Charles I included a promise (in Latin) to uphold the rightful laws and customs quas vulgus elegerit. There was a controversy over the meaning of this phrase: the verb elegerit is ambiguous, representing either the future perfect ("which the common people shall have chosen"), or perfect subjunctive ("which the common people may have chosen").  Charles I, adopting the latter interpretation, considered himself committed only to uphold those laws and customs that already existed at the time of his coronation.    The Long Parliament preferred the former translation, interpreting the oath as an undertaking to assent to any law passed by Parliament, as the representative of the "common people".  The restoration Convention Parliament resolved the issue by removing the disputed phrase from the Oath.

After the English Civil War, it was accepted that Parliament should be summoned to meet regularly, but it was still commonplace for monarchs to refuse royal assent to bills. The Sedition Act of 1661 even made it a treasonable offence to suggest that Parliament had "a legislative power without the king".  In 1678, Charles II withheld his assent from a bill "for preserving the Peace of the Kingdom by raising the Militia, and continuing them in Duty for Two and Forty Days,""House of Lords Journal Volume 13: 27 November 1678". Journal of the House of Lords: volume 13: 1675–1681 (1771), pp. 380–85. Retrieved 12 April 2007. suggesting that he, not Parliament, should control the militia."The making and keeping of Acts" (PDF). History Today, Vol. VI, pp. 765–773, 1956. Retrieved 18 April 2007. William III made comparatively liberal use of the royal veto, withholding assent from five public bills between 1692 and 1696.  These were:

 The Judges Bill (vetoed 1692) would have regulated the fees charged by judges, and removed the right of the monarch to dismiss judges at will, stipulating that a judge should hold his commission "on good behaviour".  One contemporary observer reported that William's veto was recommended by the judges themselves, concerned that the regulation of their fees would deprive them of a lucrative source of income.
 The Royal Mines Bill (vetoed 1692) would have clearly defined the Monarch's right to seize any mine containing gold or silver.  A similar bill was again passed by Parliament and given Royal Assent in the following year.
 The Triennial Bill (vetoed 1693) would have ensured Parliament would meet annually, and that no parliament could last longer than three years.  A similar law, without the requirement for annual parliamentary sessions, was approved by the King in 1694 and became law.
 The Place Bill (vetoed 1694) would have prevented members of Parliament from accepting any office or employment under the Crown without standing for re-election. A similar provision was later approved by William as part of the Act of Settlement 1701.
 The Qualifications Bill (vetoed 1696) would have established property qualifications for members of Parliament.

Carafano suggests that William III considered the royal veto "his personal legislative tool".  By contrast, the last Stuart monarch, Anne, withheld her assent from a bill just once.  On 11 March 1708, she vetoed the Scottish Militia Bill on the advice of her ministers.  No monarch has since withheld royal assent on a bill passed by Parliament.

During the rule of the succeeding Hanoverian dynasty, power was gradually exercised more by Parliament and the government. The first Hanoverian monarch, George I, became heir presumptive and then king late in life; speaking English as a second language and being at first unfamiliar with British politics and customs, he relied on his ministers to a greater extent than had previous monarchs. Later Hanoverian monarchs attempted to restore royal control over legislation: George III and George IV both openly opposed Catholic EmancipationConway, Stephen. "Book Review: George III: An Essay in Monarchy". The Institute of Historical Research, February 2003. Retrieved 12 April 2007."George IV (1762–1830)". BBC History. Retrieved 12 April 2007. and asserted that to grant assent to a Catholic emancipation bill would violate the Coronation Oath, which required the Sovereign to preserve and protect the established Church of England from Papal domination, and would grant rights to individuals who were in league with a foreign power which did not recognise their legitimacy. However, George IV reluctantly granted his assent upon the advice of his ministers. Thus, as the concept of ministerial responsibility has evolved, the power to withhold royal assent has fallen into disuse, both in the United Kingdom and in the other Commonwealth realms.

In 1914, George V did take legal advice on withholding royal assent from the Government of Ireland Bill, a highly contentious piece of legislation that the Liberal government intended to push through Parliament by means of the Parliament Act 1911. The King decided that he should not withhold assent without "convincing evidence that it would avert a national disaster, or at least have a tranquillising effect on the distracting conditions of the time".

Scotland

Royal assent is the final stage in the legislative process for acts of the Scottish Parliament. The process is governed by sections 28, 32, and 33 of the Scotland Act 1998. After a bill has been passed, the Presiding Officer of the Scottish Parliament submits it to the monarch for royal assent after a four-week period, during which the Advocate General for Scotland, the Lord Advocate, the Attorney General or the Secretary of State for Scotland"Stage of a bill". The Scottish Parliament. Retrieved 29 June 2015. may refer the bill to the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom (prior to 1 October 2009, the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council) for review of its legality. Royal assent is signified by letters patent under the Great Seal of Scotland in the following form which is set out in The Scottish Parliament (Letters Patent and Proclamations) Order 1999 (SI 1999/737) and of which notice is published in the London, Edinburgh, and Belfast Gazettes:

After the House of Representatives has debated the law, it either approves it and sends it to the Senate with the text "The Second Chamber of the States General sends the following approved proposal of law to the First Chamber", or it rejects it and returns it to the government with the text "The Second Chamber of the States General has rejected the accompanying proposal of law." If the upper house then approves the law, it sends it back to the government with the text "To the King, The States General have accepted the proposal of law as it is offered here."

The government, consisting of the monarch and the ministers, will then usually approve the proposal and the Sovereign and one of the ministers signs the proposal with the addition of an enacting clause, thereafter notifying the States General that "The King assents to the proposal." It has happened in exceptional circumstances that the government does not approve a law that has been passed in parliament. In such a case, neither the monarch nor a minister will sign the bill, notifying the States General that "The King will keep the proposal under advisement." A law that has received royal assent will be published in the State Magazine, with the original being kept in the archives of the King's Offices.

Norway
Articles 77–79 of the Norwegian Constitution specifically grant the monarch of Norway the right to withhold royal assent from any bill passed by the Storting."The Constitution ". The Storting's Information Service. Retrieved 12 April 2012. Should the monarch ever choose to exercise this privilege, Article 79 provides a means by which his veto may be over-ridden: "If a Bill has been passed unaltered by two sessions of the Storting, constituted after two separate successive elections and separated from each other by at least two intervening sessions of the Storting, without a divergent Bill having been passed by any Storting in the period between the first and last adoption, and it is then submitted to the King with a petition that His Majesty shall not refuse his assent to a Bill which, after the most mature deliberation, the Storting considers to be beneficial, it shall become law even if the Royal Assent is not accorded before the Storting goes into recess." 

One of the few instances where the King refused to give assent was in 1905, when Oscar II (who was also King of Sweden at the time) refused to sign a law giving Norway her own consulates. This caused Norway to secede from the union under a single king.

Spain
In Part II of the 1978 Spanish constitution, among provisions concerning the Crown, Article 62(a) invests the sanction (i.e. Royal Assent) and promulgation of laws with the monarch of Spain. Chapter 2 of Part III, concerning the Drafting of Bills, outlines the method by which bills are passed. According to Article 91, the monarch shall give his or her assent and promulgate the new law within fifteen days of passage of a bill by the Cortes Generales. Article 92 invests the monarch with the right to call for a referendum, on the advice of the president of the government (commonly referred to in English as the prime minister) and the authorisation of the cortes.

No provision within the constitution grants the monarch an ability to veto legislation directly; however, no provision prohibits the Sovereign from withholding royal assent, which effectively constitutes a veto. When the Spanish media asked King Juan Carlos if he would endorse the bill legalising same-sex marriages, he answered: "Soy el Rey de España y no el de Bélgica" ("I am the King of Spain and not that of Belgium")—a reference to King Baudouin of Belgium, who had refused to sign the Belgian law legalising abortion. The King gave royal assent to Law 13/2005 on 1 July 2005; the law was gazetted in the Boletín Oficial del Estado on 2 July and came into effect on 3 July 2005. Likewise, in 2010, King Juan Carlos gave royal assent to a law permitting abortion.

If the Spanish monarch ever refused in conscience to grant royal assent, a procedure similar to the Belgian handling of King Baudouin's objection would not be possible under the current constitution. If the Sovereign were ever declared incapable of discharging royal authority, his or her powers would not be transferred to the Cabinet, pending the parliamentary appointment of a regency. Instead, the constitution mandates the next person of age in the line of succession would immediately become regent. Therefore, had Juan Carlos followed the Belgian example in 2005 or 2010, a declaration of incapacity would have transferred power to Felipe, then the heir apparent.

Tonga
Articles 41 and 68 of the constitution empower the Sovereign to withhold royal assent from bills adopted by the Legislative Assembly.  In 2010, the kingdom moved towards greater democracy, with King George Tupou V saying that he would be guided by his prime minister in the exercising of his powers. Nonetheless, this does not preclude an independent royal decision to exercise a right of veto. In November 2011, the assembly adopted an Arms and Ammunitions (Amendment) Bill, which reduced the possible criminal sentences for the illicit possession of firearms. The bill was adopted by ten votes to eight. Two members of the assembly had recently been charged with the illicit possession of firearms. The Prime Minister, Lord Tuʻivakanō, voted in favour of the amendment. Members of the opposition denounced the bill and asked the King to veto it, which he did in December."Democracy at Work?"  , Lopeti Senituli, Taimi Media Network, 17 November 2011"Houses slashes penalties for firearms offenses", Matangi Tonga, 14 October 2011"King withholds assent on lower firearms penalties", Matangi Tonga, 9 January 2012"Tonga king blocks arms amendment act", Radio New Zealand International, 10 January 2012

Presidential vetoes
In certain republican constitutions, royal assent has developed into the possibility of a presidential veto, such as in the United States of America or in several European countries.

Notes

References

Further reading
 "Act of Parliament" and "Parliament". In Encyclopædia Britannica, 11th ed. London (1911): Cambridge University Press.
 Bond, M. F. (1956). "La Reyne le Veult: The making and keeping of Acts at Westminster". "History Today", (Vol. 6, pp. 756–773). Retrieved 11 April 2007.
 Companion to the Standing Orders and guide to the Proceedings of the House of Lords (22nd ed). Retrieved 11 April 2007.
 Hansard, House of Lords, 2 March 1967, columns 1181–1191
 "The Honourable John C. Bowen, 1937–50. Legislative Assembly of Alberta. Retrieved 11 April 2007.
 "Royal Assent Act. (2002, c. 15)" Department of Justice Canada, 2002. Retrieved 14 August 2012.
 "Queen and Prince Charles using power of veto over new laws, Whitehall documents reveal" The Telegraph

External links
.
Royal Assent, UK Parliament.Royal Assent

Category:Westminster system
Category:Constitution of the United Kingdom
Category:Royal prerogative
Category:Legal terminology