Guernsey, Jersey, and Man are technically not a part of the U.K. but are possessions of the U.K. Crown. Theoretically. they could become independent, sovereign monarchies. But maybe they would just be absorbed by whatever polity replaces the U.K. What do you all think would happen? And who knows what would happen in the Commonwealth Realms. The House of Windsor might still retain the Crown, just not the Crown of the U.K.
There would be a successor to the Crown in the UK itself — let’s call it the State; the sovereignty of the UK would be vested in, and exercised by, the State rather than by the Crown. This might be acheived constitutionally, through legislation in which the Crown assented to its own abolition and replacement, or it might happen by means of a (violent or peaceful) revolution; I don’t think it matters.
Currently Guernsey, Jersey, Man, etc are dependencies of the Crown; they could become dependencies of the State instead, with the UK continuing to exercise the same functions with respect to them as it currently does.
In the Commonwealth Realms we’d consult Statute of Westminster, 1931.
Or could be considered independent Kingdoms If they are not currently part of the UK, by what right does the UK have to annex them?
There would be no annexation. They’re already dependencies of the UK; they would continue to be dependencies of the UK. They would not be annexed to the UK.
Something similar has happened before. For example, in 1870 France abolished the Second Empire and established the Third Republic. The status of French colonies and possessions around the world continued unchanged; they continued to be colonies and posessions of France and they didn’t need to be recolonised, reclaimed, etc.
Unrelated to the UK’s transition to a republic — i.e. even if the transition to a republic weren’t happening — any of the dependencies could assert a right of self-determination and seek to establish themselves as independent sovereign states, and those states could be monarchies with Charles Windsor as monarch (assuming he was agreeable). This has happened many times with UK colonies and there is no fundamental reason why it couldn’t happen with UK dependencies. But the adoption by the UK of a republican form of government wouldn’t automatically or inherently trigger it.
It seems to me that, if the UK became a republic and no steps were taken to change the constitutional laws of e.g. Jersey, then Jersey would continue to be governed exactly as it is today, with the exception that the Lieutenant-Governor would no longer be the representative of the Crown but rather the reprsentative of the successor organ in the (presumably renamed) UK. The UK’s existing oversight of the government of Jersey, including its power to extend UK laws to Jersey and its (rarely-exercised) power to intervene in other ways, would continue unchanged. And the same would apply, mutatis mutandis, to Guernsey and Man.
Wouldnt it be cool if Isle of Man declared to be its own sovereignty.
And you were king.
“The Man of Man” could be the official title for the King
We’d come to some arrangement. Probably, as noted above, the least disruptive possible (the islands aren’t run by those of the most radical temperament, shall we say): whatever allows them to carry on as low-tax offshore financial havens.
As for Commonwealth realms, that’s up to them. Barbados changed to a republic recently without much hoo-ha.
Someone asked me if it was a peninsula. I said ‘no, Man is an island’.
Yep. This is the British way; we’ll muddle along. A former Archbishop of Canterbury, on being told that God had abandoned the Church of England, is reported to have replied to the effect: “well, we’ll just carry on as best we can”.
Some entity or entities would inherit ownership/stewardship/control of the lands and such that are currently part of the crown estate; some of them (such as the foreshore) might devolve to local councils - islands would likely function as unitary authorities like the Isle of Wight does already (as do many mainland counties).
If the transition was not a peaceful one - if the UK had something like the French Revolution, the resulting chaos means all bets are off - the channel islands might get annexed by France (since you can literally see them from the coast of Normandy); that annexation might even be a welcome one if the mainland of the UK is on fire.
What was the status of Guernsey, Jersey, and Man during the English Civil War?
Google/Wiki is your friend.
I’d imagine that as the successor to the Crown, the Brittanic Republic (or whatever it was called) would assert its claim and annex them.
That’s just it, they’re NOT dependencies of the UK. At least legally, they’re personal possessions of the Crown, as part of their role as the Duke of Normandy.
I think there’s a little too much weight being laid on the concept of ‘The Crown’. These places aren’t dependancies of the UK because we have a monarch. If we replace a Monarch with a President, the relationship is still the same. The wording merely changes. This may be confusing for countries which don’t have monarchies, but basically anything represented/done by the British State is basically done in the name of ‘The Crown’. It doesn’t mean Jersey has a direct relationship with the King.
Which means that France would have the right of first refusal to the islands?
Perhaps the royals could flee to one island and call it “The United Kingdom,” while the original U.K. rebrands as “The People’s United Kingdom”?
Man would wear a Jersey while taking care of the Guernsey.
The sovereign is already styled “Lord of Mann”, which is a title that I don’t think can be improved upon. According to wikipedia, before 1504, they were styled “King of Mann”, which somehow seems a step down from “Lord of Mann”.
How about the People’s Front of Britain?
But they are subject to the legislative jurisdiction of Parliament. They aren’t a personal possession of the monarch.
“We’re the People’s Front of Britain!”