| Queen ofRhodesia | |
|---|---|
.svg) | |
 Stamp issued 1966 | |
| Details | |
| Style | Her Majesty |
| Formation | 11 November 1965 |
| Abolition | 2 March 1970 |
Queen of Rhodesia was the title asserted forElizabeth II asRhodesia's constitutional monarch following the country'sUnilateral Declaration of Independence (UDI) from theUnited Kingdom. TheIan Smith government initially maintained allegiance to Elizabeth, regarding itself as Her Majesty's Government in Rhodesia. Under the amended Rhodesian constitution of 1965, it attempted to retain Elizabeth as Queen, and all oaths were still taken to her. However, the British government, along with theUnited Nations and almost all world governments, regarded the declaration of independence as an illegal act. Elizabeth refused to recognise the title, and it remained unrecognised elsewhere in the world. The Rhodesian government declared the country a republic in 1970, abolishing the position of monarch.
.jpg)
Southern Rhodesia had been grantedresponsible government in 1923, after the transfer from rule under theBritish South Africa Company. The monarch of the United Kingdom was automatically recognised as monarch in the colonies. Following the UK refusing to grant Southern Rhodesiaindependence under minority rule, on 11 November 1965, theRhodesian Front government ofPrime MinisterIan Smith unilaterally declared independence. However, Smith's government reasserted "unswerving loyalty and devotion" toElizabeth II. To that end, the new Rhodesian constitution included as an annex to UDI retained the monarchy and recognised Elizabeth as queen of Rhodesia.[1] Smith and his ministers maintained they were only breaking from the British government, not the Queen. They saw the retention of the monarchy as part of a "loyal rebellion".[2] The declaration of independence ended with "God Save The Queen", and all Rhodesian oaths were still taken to "Her Majesty the Queen Elizabeth, Queen of Rhodesia, her heirs and successors".[3][4]
In response, the Britishgovernor of Southern Rhodesia,Sir Humphrey Gibbs, dismissed the Smith government from office, declaring UDI to be an act of treason. However, Smith and his ministers claimed that under the new constitution, Gibbs "no longer (had) any executive powers in Rhodesia," and hisreserve power to sack them no longer existed.[5][6]
TheBritish Parliament passed theSouthern Rhodesia Act 1965, whichde jure affirmed British control of the colony and granted Elizabeth II the power to act in the colony. Soon after grantingRoyal Assent to the bill, Elizabeth issued anorder-in-council suspending the Rhodesian constitution and reaffirming the dismissal of the government.[7] These were ignored in Rhodesia; Smith claimed it was an act of the British government and not of the Queen. The Rhodesian theory believed in the divisibility ofthe Crown to show their political autonomy.[8] The Rhodesians also ceased to recognise Gibbs as the representative of the Queen and asked him to move out ofGovernment House, Salisbury; Gibbs refused. Smith then asked Queen Elizabeth II to appoint agovernor-general to act on her behalf in Rhodesia. He recommended his deputy,Clifford Dupont, for the new viceregal position. Elizabeth did not recognise the title and turned down Smith's request out of hand; she issued a response via Gibbs that said: "Her Majesty is not able to entertain purported advice of this kind and has therefore been pleased to direct that no action should be taken upon it".[7][9] While Smith saw the letter as an assertion of his claimed prerogatives as Her Majesty's Rhodesian prime minister, Elizabeth treated Smith's request as if it had come from an ordinary citizen, since she and her government no longer recognised Smith as prime minister.[7] Under the provisions of the Southern Rhodesia Act and with the near-unanimous support of the international community, the British government asserted that Gibbs was the Queen's sole legitimate representative in (Southern) Rhodesia, and hence the only lawful authority in the area.[10]
Accordingly Smith appointed Dupont asOfficer Administering the Government in place of any royal appointment. It was initially suggested by Rhodesian officials that, due to hisStuart ancestry, they would appoint theDuke of Montrose asregent until Elizabeth accepted the Rhodesian crown. The suggestion was rejected as a violation of theRegency Act 1953.[11] On the British side, the diplomatMichael Palliser suggested that Elizabeth appoint her husbandPrince Philip as governor-general and have him arrive with a detachment ofColdstream Guards to legally sack Smith and the Rhodesian Front.[12] However the plan was not feasible due to bringing the royal family into politics, as well as the risk to Philip's safety.[12]
The monarch's powers were the same as prior to theUnilateral Declaration of Independence. However they werede facto exercised by the Officer Administering the Government (Clifford Dupont) rather than by the governor of Southern Rhodesia (SirHumphrey Gibbs) as Queen Elizabeth II'sde jure representative. Every Rhodesian Bill presented to the Officer Administering the Government, had the followingwords of enactment:[13]
Be it enacted by His Excellency the Officer Administering the Government as representative of the Queen's Most Excellent Majesty, by and with the advice and consent of the Parliament of Rhodesia
In 1968, Elizabethcommuted the sentence of three African men sentenced to death.[14] The Smith government ignored the pardon afterHigh Court of Rhodesia ruled that, as Rhodesian officials had not been consulted, the pardon came from the orders of the British government rather than from the Queen of Rhodesia. The three men were executed.[15][16][17]
The Queen's portrait featured on Rhodesian banknotes and coins, as well as on postage stamps.[18]
There had been calls for Rhodesia to become a republic as early as 1966.[19] The Whaley Commission had been set up by the Rhodesian government in 1967 to review the constitution and recommendations for alterations.[20] After Queen Elizabeth II's pardon was ignored, the Rhodesian government announced that theQueen's Official Birthday would no longer be a public holiday and they would only fire a 21-gun salute on her actual birthday.[21]
The Rhodesian Front published the Whaley Report's proposals for a referendum to abolish the monarchy and establish a republic with a new constitution a month after the executions.[20][22] Smith argued for it on the grounds that the British government "had denied us the Queen of Rhodesia".[23] In the1969 Rhodesian constitutional referendum, the Rhodesian electorate voted in favour of the establishment of a republic. The move was opposed by theRoman Catholic Church over fears it would lead to further marginalisation of blacks in Rhodesia.[24] Gibbs also resigned as Governor at this time.[25] The internationally unrecognised republic was declared on 2 March 1970. In response, Queen Elizabeth II formally revoked the royal titles of theRoyal Rhodesian Air Force andRoyal Rhodesia Regiment.[26]Queen Elizabeth The Queen Mother's honorary commissionership of theBritish South Africa Police was also suspended.[27] Dupont replaced Elizabeth II as head of state in Rhodesia as the newpresident.[28]
Contrary to Smith's hope that such a move would bring international legitimacy, it had the opposite effect. All countries that had relations with Rhodesia, exceptPortugal andSouth Africa, withdrew their diplomatic missions from the country. This was because originally they maintained relations because of the pre-existing royal accreditation but because a republic had been declared, that rationale was no longer valid.[29]
Rhodesia remained an unrecognised republic untilZimbabwe Rhodesia agreed to return to colonial status in 1979. Queen Elizabeth II resumed monarchical duties over the colony through her role as Queen of the United Kingdom and appointedLord Soames as her representative as Governor of Southern Rhodesia until its independence asZimbabwe on 18 April 1980.[30]