This story has been getting some attention online in recent days, but I don’t think it’s what you guys think it is. King Charles is immune from prosecution, because of the way the whole British legal system is set up. They’ve set a verbal trap for themselves: criminal cases are brought against defendants in the name of the king, so a king could not bring charges against himself. This immunity from prosecution extends across the board, not just for violent criminal acts, but for mundane acts of failing to adhere to local farming regulations. This has come up because Welsh campaigners want Charles prosecuted under the Agriculture Act.

Campaigners are set to seek advice on a possible legal challenge to King Charles’s efforts to remain immune from prosecution under a Welsh law. A report by The Guardian told how a Buckingham Palace official phoned the Welsh Government to seek assurances the monarch would not be prosecuted under the Agriculture (Wales) Act. The elected minister who draw up the legislation agreed to a special exemption for the King last year but was reportedly “not happy” about it.

The King was exempted from regulations relating to the marketing of agricultural products, the disposal of carcasses and the disclosure of information to the Welsh state. According to documents, on June 1 last year the Welsh Government noted in an internal memo that its lawyers “had been contacted by Buckingham Palace officials who have sought an assurance that Welsh ministers will take into account conventions regarding prosecuting the crown when making regulations under this bill”.

In an email the following day, Welsh officials noted that Mick Antoniw, the Welsh government’s counsel general was “not happy with the exclusion” but “recognises the ongoing convention and therefore” agreed to it. This was a reference to an ill-defined convention under which criminal and civil proceedings cannot be brought against the monarch as head of state.

Now anti-monarchy group Republic has said it will be seeking advice on a possible legal challenge to the monarch’s immunity. CEO Graham Smith said the convention “must be tested in court”. He said: “Either we are all equal in law or none of us are. It is an outrage that Charles continues to exploit this outdated convention to ensure he’s immune from prosecution. Charles should be ashamed of himself for demanding unique protections that allow him to bypass legislation farmers, rural communities and everyone else must abide by. This convention must be tested in court, it cannot be right that a rule that dates back hundreds of years still protects Charles’s private interests and wealth from the law of the land.”

“I am seeking legal advice on whether it is possible to challenge this nonsense, and to ensure Charles and all the royals are held to the same standards as everyone else.”

According to Buckingham Palace, the royal household rang the Welsh Government to ensure that “as a matter of legal correctness” the monarch could not be prosecuted under the Agriculture (Wales) Act. A palace spokesperson said the convention had to be maintained as the draft act contained a particular type of legislation that would not rule out the possibility of a prosecution.

[From The National]

See, this is yet another telling incident about palace bureaucracy rather than, like, an admission that the king or someone in his family did crime. This was some palace flunkie exerting what little power he had to ensure that some random Welsh agriculture law would not ever be applied to the king. The Welsh lawmakers should have come back with: “well now that you mention it…” Anyway, a “royal source” has gone on the record (not as a named source) to say that the king would never apply pressure on Welsh officials to be immune from prosecution in perpetuity. Except for all of the times the palace has done just that, like this exact situation.

Photos courtesy of Backgrid.