The Best Kingdoms That Issue Royal Decrees and Their Differences from Presidential Decrees
Royal decrees and presidential decrees are key instruments of authority in monarchies and republics, respectively. They enable rulers or presidents to issue legally binding orders without parliamentary approval. However, their origins, nature, and implications differ significantly due to the distinct political systems from which they emerge.
This article explores some of the most notable kingdoms known for issuing royal decrees and explains how royal decrees differ from presidential decrees.
1. Best Kingdoms Known for Issuing Royal Decrees
A. The Kingdom of Morocco
- Type of Monarchy: Constitutional with executive powers
- Instrument: Dahirs (ظهائر شريفة), which are royal decrees.
- Authority: Legally binding, but within the framework of the Moroccan constitution.
- Examples:
- Dahir No. 1-58-376 (1958): Established Morocco’s modern civil status law.
- Dahir on Family Law (2004): Reformed the family code (Moudawana), enhancing women’s rights.
Significance: Moroccan royal decrees (dahirs) are significant because they combine the authority of the monarch with the legislative framework of a constitutional monarchy.
B. The United Kingdom (British Monarchy)
- Type of Monarchy: Constitutional
- Instrument: Royal Proclamations, Orders in Council, Royal Assent
- Authority: Symbolic and ceremonial, as real legislative power rests with Parliament.
- Examples:
- The Royal Assent is a formal way for the monarch to approve laws passed by Parliament.
- Royal Proclamations were used historically to declare states of war or announce parliamentary dissolutions.
Notable Decree: The Proclamation of 1763, issued by King George III, restricted colonial expansion westward in North America, contributing to tensions that led to the American Revolution.
C. The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia
- Type of Monarchy: Absolute
- Instrument: Royal Decrees (أوامر ملكية)
- Authority: Legally binding and supreme, with no parliamentary override.
- Examples:
- Royal Decree No. M/6 (2018): Allowed women to drive, marking a historic shift in Saudi law.
- Vision 2030 Decrees: Enacted economic and social reforms to diversify the Saudi economy.
Significance: Saudi royal decrees are direct laws and policies issued by the king without parliamentary consent, reflecting the absolute power of the monarchy.
D. The Kingdom of Spain
- Type of Monarchy: Constitutional
- Instrument: Royal Decrees (Reales Decretos)
- Authority: Issued by the government but sanctioned by the monarch.
- Examples:
- Royal Decree-Law 463/2020: Declared a state of emergency during the COVID-19 pandemic.
- Royal Decree on Succession (2014): Facilitated the abdication of King Juan Carlos I and the accession of King Felipe VI.
Significance: In Spain, royal decrees are primarily government orders, but they carry the symbolic weight of royal authority and require the monarch’s countersignature.
E. The Japanese Empire (Emperor of Japan)
- Type of Monarchy: Ceremonial (Post-WWII)
- Instrument: Historically, Imperial Edicts; today, Cabinet Orders with Imperial Sanction.
- Authority: Symbolic under the post-war constitution; previously, imperial edicts held supreme authority.
- Examples:
- Imperial Rescript on Education (1890): Defined moral education during the Meiji period.
- Imperial Declaration of Surrender (1945): Announced Japan’s surrender in World War II.
Significance: Modern imperial decrees are ceremonial, but historically, they were central to Japanese law and governance.
2. Difference Between Royal Decrees and Presidential Decrees
A. System of Government
| Aspect | Royal Decree (Monarchy) | Presidential Decree (Republic) |
|---|---|---|
| Political System | Issued in monarchies (absolute or constitutional) | Issued in republics (presidential or semi-presidential systems) |
| Source of Authority | The Monarch, often seen as the embodiment of state or divine power | The President, typically an elected head of state or government |
| Historical Legacy | Deeply rooted in tradition, heritage, and divine right | Rooted in modern constitutions and separation of powers |
B. Nature of Authority
| Aspect | Royal Decree | Presidential Decree |
|---|---|---|
| Scope of Power | Can be absolute (e.g., Saudi Arabia) or ceremonial (e.g., UK) | Typically limited by the constitution and checks from legislature |
| Binding Force | Often carries the force of law, especially in absolute monarchies | Has legal authority, but may be challenged or overturned by courts |
| Accountability | Rarely requires parliamentary approval (except in constitutional monarchies) | Often requires judicial review or legislative oversight |
C. Examples of Use
| Scenario | Royal Decree Example | Presidential Decree Example |
|---|---|---|
| Social Reform | Saudi Arabia (2018): Women allowed to drive | United States (2012): DACA (Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals) by President Obama |
| State of Emergency | Spain (2020): COVID-19 lockdown via Royal Decree | France (2015): State of emergency declared after terrorist attacks |
| National Policy | Morocco (2004): Family Code reforms (Moudawana) | Russia (2014): Presidential decree on Crimea’s annexation |
D. Lifespan and Reversibility
| Aspect | Royal Decree | Presidential Decree |
|---|---|---|
| Duration | Can be permanent unless repealed by a new decree or legislative act | Often has a temporary scope unless passed into law by Congress or Parliament |
| Amendments | Can only be reversed by the monarch or a subsequent government decree | Can be overturned by courts, legislative bodies, or future presidents |
3. Key Differences in Accountability and Symbolism
| Factor | Royal Decree | Presidential Decree |
|---|---|---|
| Symbolic Weight | Often carries historical, cultural, and symbolic significance | More politically driven, reflecting the agenda of the executive branch |
| Public Perception | Seen as a manifestation of monarchical tradition or divine right | Viewed as a political tool and may face more public scrutiny |
| Check and Balance | Limited, unless under a constitutional monarchy | Subject to legislative checks, judicial review, and public opinion |
4. Which Is More Powerful: Royal or Presidential Decrees?
- In absolute monarchies (e.g., Saudi Arabia, Brunei): Royal decrees are often more powerful than presidential decrees, as they are supreme laws without legislative constraints.
- In constitutional monarchies (e.g., UK, Spain, Japan): Royal decrees are largely ceremonial or symbolic, with real legislative power resting in elected governments.
- In republics (e.g., United States, Russia, France): Presidential decrees can be far-reaching, but they are subject to checks and balances, making them less absolute than royal decrees in monarchies.
5. Modern Trends and Challenges
- Shifts in Power: Over time, royal decrees have transitioned from absolute instruments of rule to ceremonial formalities in many monarchies.
- Constitutional Limits: In most modern republics, presidential decrees are increasingly limited by constitutional courts and legislative powers.
- Public Opinion and Legitimacy: Both royal and presidential decrees face growing scrutiny in the digital age, where public transparency and accountability are demanded.
Understanding the Legacy and Authority of Decrees
Royal and presidential decrees are powerful tools of governance, reflecting their respective political systems. Royal decrees carry the weight of tradition, monarchy, and history, while presidential decrees embody the modern exercise of executive power within constitutional frameworks.
While their forms differ, their purpose is the same: to enact the will of the sovereign authority swiftly and effectively. However, history teaches that decrees—whether royal or presidential—must be tempered with justice, wisdom, and accountability, for power without restraint can lead to abuse and rebellion.
Comparison of Royal and Presidential Protocols in Different Countries
Introduction
Protocols are formal procedures that guide the behavior, ceremonies, and interactions of state leaders. In monarchies and republics, these protocols differ based on tradition, authority, and political structure. This article compares the protocols observed in royal and presidential systems across notable countries, highlighting the differences and similarities.
1. Comparison of Royal Protocols (Monarchies)
| Aspect | United Kingdom (Constitutional Monarchy) | Saudi Arabia (Absolute Monarchy) | Morocco (Constitutional Monarchy with Executive Power) | Japan (Ceremonial Monarchy) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Title of Leader | King/Queen | King (Custodian of the Two Holy Mosques) | King (Amir al-Mu’minin – Commander of the Faithful) | Emperor |
| Executive Power | Ceremonial; Real power lies with Parliament | Absolute; King holds supreme power | Executive powers shared with Parliament and Government | Ceremonial; Real power lies with Prime Minister |
| Issuance of Decrees | Symbolic (Royal Assent to laws) | Full legislative authority via Royal Decrees (Amr Maliki) | Dahirs (Royal Decrees) have the force of law | Cabinet issues orders; Emperor gives symbolic approval |
| Ceremonial Protocols | – State Opening of Parliament- Trooping the Colour- Royal Weddings and Jubilees | – Bay’ah Ceremony (Pledge of Allegiance)- Hajj Reception- National Day Parade | – Throne Speech to Parliament- Religious ceremonies during Eid- Coronation Ceremonies | – Enthronement Ceremony- Shinto Rites- New Year Greeting Ceremony |
| Diplomatic Role | Hosts state visits; ceremonial head of state | Hosts state visits; active in foreign policy | Active in diplomacy; represents Morocco internationally | Symbolic; Prime Minister conducts state affairs |
| Military Role | Commander-in-Chief in title only | Supreme Commander of the Armed Forces | Supreme Commander of the Royal Moroccan Armed Forces | Commander-in-Chief in title only |
| Religious Role | Defender of the Faith (Head of the Church of England) | Custodian of the Two Holy Mosques (Islamic leadership) | Amir al-Mu’minin (Spiritual and political leadership in Islam) | Symbolic religious figure in Shinto tradition |
| Dress Code | Royal Robes for ceremonies Military uniforms | Traditional Thobe and Bisht for ceremonies | Traditional Moroccan Jellaba, Kaftan, or military uniform | Imperial Robes (Korozen no Gohō) for rituals |
| Salutation Protocol | Bowing, curtsying, or addressing as “Your Majesty” | Addressing as “Your Majesty” (Khadem al-Haramain) | Addressing as “Your Majesty” (Sidi al-Malik) | Deep bowing (no handshake) and addressing as “His Majesty” |
| Succession Protocol | Hereditary; Act of Settlement governs succession | Hereditary (Sons of the founding King Abdulaziz) | Hereditary within the Alaouite dynasty | Hereditary; Emperor’s role defined by the Imperial Household Law |
2. Comparison of Presidential Protocols (Republics)
| Aspect | United States (Federal Republic) | France (Semi-Presidential Republic) | Russia (Federal Presidential Republic) | China (One-Party State, Presidential System) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Title of Leader | President (Head of State & Government) | President (Head of State) & Prime Minister (Head of Government) | President (Head of State & Commander-in-Chief) | President (Head of State & Party General Secretary) |
| Executive Power | Strong executive power; veto authority | Shares power with Prime Minister (dual executive) | Strong executive power; limited checks | Strong executive power; party control |
| Issuance of Decrees | Executive Orders (binding without legislative approval) | Décrets présidentiels (Presidential Decrees) | Ukaz (Presidential Decrees, legally binding) | Presidential Orders (binding; Party law overrides) |
| Ceremonial Protocols | – Inauguration Day (Oath of Office)- State of the Union Address- Presidential Medal of Freedom | – Bastille Day Military Parade- Presidential Inauguration at Élysée Palace | – Presidential Inauguration- Victory Day Parade- National Unity Day | – National Day Parade (Tiananmen Square)- Annual Party Congress Speech |
| Diplomatic Role | Chief Diplomat; signs treaties, hosts summits | Represents France abroad; appoints ambassadors | Conducts foreign policy and treaties | Directs foreign policy with party consent |
| Military Role | Commander-in-Chief of the U.S. Armed Forces | Commander-in-Chief; can declare emergencies | Commander-in-Chief; oversees the Security Council | Commander-in-Chief of the People’s Liberation Army |
| Religious Role | None (Secular state) | None (Secular state) | None (Secular state, but promotes Orthodox Church) | None (Atheist state by party ideology) |
| Dress Code | Suit and tie for formal events; military uniform for armed forces ceremonies | Suit and tie; Presidential sash on formal occasions | Suit with medals or military dress for ceremonies | Suit and tie or Mao-style suit for official ceremonies |
| Salutation Protocol | Addressed as “Mr. President” with a handshake | Addressed as “Monsieur le Président” | Addressed as “Mr. President” or “Ваше Превосходительство” (Your Excellency) | Addressed as “President” or “General Secretary” |
| Succession Protocol | Presidential line of succession (VP, Speaker, etc.) | No VP; President of Senate acts temporarily | Prime Minister acts as interim leader | Vice President or Politburo selection |
3. Key Differences Between Royal and Presidential Protocols
| Aspect | Royal Protocol (Monarchies) | Presidential Protocol (Republics) |
|---|---|---|
| Source of Authority | Based on hereditary rule, divine right, or constitutional tradition | Derived from a democratic constitution and electoral process |
| Ceremonial Importance | High; deeply rooted in tradition, pageantry, and cultural heritage | Moderate to high; varies but often focuses on state functions and national pride |
| Role in Governance | Varies (Absolute: Full power; Constitutional: Limited or symbolic) | Active; typically head of government or state with executive powers |
| Religious Influence | Strong in many monarchies (e.g., UK, Morocco, Saudi Arabia) | Limited or none due to secular constitutions |
| Succession Process | Hereditary, often defined by dynastic laws | Elected, through popular vote or legislative appointment |
| Public Image and Media | Often seen as symbols of national unity and continuity | Viewed as political figures, subject to public approval and criticism |
| Diplomatic Protocols | Monarchs engage more in state visits and ceremonial diplomacy | Presidents engage in policy-driven and summit-focused diplomacy |
4. Similarities Between Royal and Presidential Protocols
| Aspect | Commonalities |
|---|---|
| National Symbolism | Both represent the nation’s unity, sovereignty, and identity. |
| Inaugural Ceremonies | Both hold formal inaugurations or coronations to mark their ascension to office. |
| State Visits | Both conduct official state visits, welcome foreign leaders, and exchange diplomatic gifts. |
| National Celebrations | Both participate in national holidays, military parades, and commemorative events. |
| Address to the Nation | Both deliver key speeches, such as State of the Union (US) or Throne Speeches (UK, Morocco). |
5. Modern Trends in Royal and Presidential Protocols
A. Convergence of Roles:
- Monarchs in constitutional systems (e.g., UK, Japan, Spain) are adopting more symbolic and ceremonial roles, resembling presidential figureheads.
- Presidents in authoritarian systems (e.g., Russia, China) have personalized their leadership styles, creating cult-like images similar to monarchs.
B. Digital Diplomacy and Social Media:
- Monarchs and Presidents are increasingly using social media (e.g., Twitter, Instagram) to engage with their public and promote transparency.
- Example: King Mohammed VI of Morocco is active on social platforms, enhancing his public image.
- U.S. Presidents frequently use social media for announcements, bypassing traditional press.
C. Simplification of Protocols:
- Modern leaders are reducing pomp and formality to connect better with citizens.
- Example: King Felipe VI of Spain reduced the extravagance of royal ceremonies.
- Example: President Macron of France simplified Élysée Palace protocols for public accessibility.
6. Conclusion: Balancing Tradition with Modernity
The protocols governing royal and presidential offices reflect their historical roots, political systems, and national identities.
- Royal Protocols emphasize tradition, continuity, and cultural heritage, especially in kingdoms like the United Kingdom, Saudi Arabia, Morocco, and Japan.
- Presidential Protocols highlight authority, democracy, and political power, as seen in countries like the United States, France, Russia, and China.
Despite their differences, both protocols serve a common purpose: to symbolize the state, unite the people, and uphold national dignity. As the world evolves, these protocols continue to adapt, blending tradition with modernity to meet the expectations of a globalized and connected society.