SSP Diaries | Monarchies and relevance

The existence of monarchies seems more prevalent in Africa and Europe today. They are the subject of many questions pertaining to their relevance to society and the support received from the public purse. Today, I am taking a cursory look at these institutions to really see if they are still relevant.

African history tells us that monarchies were a common form of governance for many centuries. In these kingdoms, supreme power resided in the hands of individuals who had inherited such positions, which only changed upon death or abdication. Things have changed over time. Today, there are three sovereign monarchies in Africa. Two are constitutional monarchies, namely Lesotho and Morocco, and the other, Eswatini, is an absolute monarchy. Sovereign monarchies are bound by laws and customs in the exercise of their powers. Absolute monarchies speak for themselves; they rule without bounds.

In the Kingdom of Morocco, the king holds vast executive and legislative powers and issues decrees which have the force of law. He, together with the PM, heads the executive branch of government. In the Kingdom of Lesotho, the king has a ceremonial function only, with no executive authority, and he cannot participate in politics. There is a big difference with the Kingdom of Eswatini. Here, the king holds executive powers over all branches of government and is even immune from prosecution.

The trends suggest that, over time, the African continent has moved away from monarchies. The rest of the continent is comprised of republics. Although some states are still adhering to the tradition of the monarchy, there is evidence indicating a weakening of the powers once enjoyed and a movement to systems that allow the voice of the people to be heard. Eswatini is obviously different at this time, but the question is: how much longer will it be able to continue in the present vein? Internal opposition to the monarchy is increasing and cannot be suppressed forever. Widespread poverty and increasing income inequality are realities currently fuelling the fire, together with better prospects in life existing in other African countries without monarchies.

As of 2026, Europe has 12 sovereign monarchies. Ten of these are hereditary and the remainder, the Vatican and Andorra, are elective. Interestingly, Andorra is ruled jointly by the president of France and the bishop of Urgell, appointed by the pope! Most are constitutional monarchies, apart from Liechtenstein and Monaco, where royalty has extremely large influences in politics. The Vatican can be considered an absolute monarchy ruled by whomever is the pope.

Like Africa, Europe has a history of many monarchies, with significant numbers being dispensed with over time. European history speaks to a rise in republican forms of government at the beginning of the 20th century, which facilitated the demise of many monarchies after World War I. A century later, most states in Europe are republics with elected heads of state. The United Kingdom, Belgium, Luxembourg, Spain, and Sweden are the main countries that still retain monarchies. This is a small percentage of European countries. History has shown that European monarchies are also on the decline, and there is evidence to show that the relevance of these institutions continues to be questioned, especially as they present a serious cost to the public purse and inheritance rights become more of a sore point each day. On that note, it is interesting to know that the king of Norway is in line to inherit the British Crown. The two families, as are other royal families across Europe, happen to be related!

The history of monarchy across the continents of Africa and Europe is quite similar. They all started within an absolute-power framework and, over time, have evolved in most cases with reduced power bases. Their duties have become more ceremonial and traditionally symbolic, serving as rallying points for national unity, non-political in nature, and fully enshrined in law.

There is still family succession and the holding of positions for life. Putting aside the historical antecedents of royalty, in today’s world, what is there that a royal person does that a politician does not? What is it that a king or queen does that a president, as head of state of a country, cannot do?

Why should any nation be mandated to preserve and support a line of succession as its ultimate leadership component when those who inherit have never had to prove themselves before stepping into such roles? Are there any nations today that are worse off for doing away with their monarchy? The time is fast approaching when these and other relevant questions will need to be answered.

SSP Diaries - Send feedback to columns@gleanerjm.com.