21

Australians are required to vote. King Charles is the head of state of Australia and should be Australian. He does not vote in elections.

Thus, is he violating Australian law?

Jen
  • 54,294
  • 5
  • 110
  • 242
R-Obsessive
  • 1,205
  • 4
  • 17
  • 4
    What's your source for "Australians are required to vote"? I'd expect them to be required to be registered for voting, but not vote. – Greendrake Nov 14 '23 at 06:44
  • 37
    @Greendrake: https://www.aec.gov.au/faqs/: "Is voting compulsory? Yes, under federal electoral law, it is compulsory for all eligible Australian citizens to enrol and vote in federal elections, by-elections and referendums." – Nate Eldredge Nov 14 '23 at 06:50
  • 7
    How do you know that the King doesn't vote? – Nate Eldredge Nov 14 '23 at 06:51
  • 1
    @NateEldredge Also, state/territory and local elections. Technically, it's required to attend a polling place and have your name marked off - you do not have to put a ballot in the ballot box or mark it if you do. – Dale M Nov 14 '23 at 09:45
  • Technically, he's not even meant to vote in the UK, never mind Australia. Legally, he can - but by tradition, the monarch is supposed to stay out of politics... – Simon Geard Nov 15 '23 at 00:57
  • @DaleM And I can confirm that if you are on the voting roles and don't vote, you will be asked to explain why. But if you have a reasonable explanation (EG being out of the country) you won't be subject to the nominal fine. – Peter M Nov 15 '23 at 14:06
  • If we look again at that link, the passage refers to 'all eligible Australian citizens…' – Robbie Goodwin Nov 15 '23 at 22:55
  • Rex non potest peccare – Simon Crase Nov 16 '23 at 03:27
  • Anecdotally (pre-1984, when all British subjects resident in Australia had the franchise) British diplomats posted to Australia were told by local authorities that they had to vote, but instructed from London never to interfere in Australian politics and in particular not to vote. It was resolved informally when it became clear that everyone involved could if necessary claim diplomatic immunity but would prefer to just let the issue go away silently. – Henry Nov 16 '23 at 15:17
  • For context it seems that while Australia does technically make it compulsory to vote and has done so since 1925, the maximum fine for not doing so has been the same since 1984 - $20 AUD. Source: https://australiainstitute.org.au/post/voter-turnout-in-the-2022-federal-election-hit-a-new-low-threatening-our-democratic-tradition/. – Hashim Aziz Nov 16 '23 at 20:51

1 Answers1

45

King Charles III is not an Australian citizen

He was born in London, UK, which is not in Australia. To be clear, being born in Australia does not make you an Australian citizen of itself, it just means that that the documentation needed to prove citizenship will be different.

There was also a period of time when British citizenship could confer Australian citizenship and Charles was born during that time. However, neither of his parents were Australian citizens. His parents were born in London, UK and Corfu, Greece, neither of which is in Australia.

So he was not born an Australian citizen and AFAIK, he has not subsequently acquired Australian citizenship, nor has he ever become eligible to do so. As such, he is not eligible to vote and cannot enrol to do so.

King Charles III is not a resident of Australia

He lives overseas indefinitely, which would disqualify him from voting even if he were a citizen.

Neither citizenship nor residency is a corequisite to hold the office of King of Australia

Joel Coehoorn
  • 373
  • 1
  • 7
Dale M
  • 208,266
  • 17
  • 237
  • 460
  • 9
    TIL that King Charles could claim Greek citizenship – J. Doe. Nov 14 '23 at 15:15
  • 7
    TIL that the government could revoke his citizenship. – Comic Sans Seraphim Nov 14 '23 at 16:14
  • 16
    Also, as sovereign, he has absolute immunity from all laws, civil and criminal, in Australia. – ohwilleke Nov 14 '23 at 17:54
  • 14
    So not only is it not illegal for him not to vote, it would be illegal for him to vote. – gnasher729 Nov 14 '23 at 17:57
  • 13
    The gnasher729 and ohwilleke comments together seem meaning he can vote if he wants. – Ivan Nov 14 '23 at 19:07
  • 4
    @J.Doe. Prince Philip was stripped of his Greek nationality as a baby, whereafter he had only Danish nationality. Was the Greek nationality restored at some point? I suspect that he would have lost his Danish nationality when he became a naturalized British subject in 1947, but I don't know for sure that Danish nationality law had such a provision at that time. If Prince Philip was solely a British subject when Charles was born then Charles probably never had a claim to Greek nationality. – phoog Nov 14 '23 at 21:06
  • @ComicSansSeraphim it seems as though Charles never had Australian citizenship; it's unclear how the government could revoke something that never existed. – phoog Nov 14 '23 at 21:11
  • 1
    "There was also a period of time when British citizenship could confer Australian citizenship and Charles was born during that time": Charles was born before Australian citizenship existed. – phoog Nov 14 '23 at 21:15
  • @phoog: I can't speak for Greece but I know for a fact that Ireland respects "second generation" citizenship claims, i.e. a child born to a non-Irish person (i.e. has never even been Irish, since birth) whose parent (i.e. the child's grandparent) is Irish can still apply for citizenship (I know a person who did exactly this and was granted citizenship). In that case, Prince Phillip's lack of Greek citizenship would not be a problem as long as their parent was still Greek. Whether this rule applies to Greece, I don't know. – Flater Nov 14 '23 at 21:17
  • 1
    @Flater Charles's paternal grandfather was also deprived of his Greek nationality at the same time as Charles's infant father (in fact it was rather Philip's father who was being exiled; 18-month-old Philip was just caught in the crossfire). Greece does not have a rule similar to Ireland's; there has to be an unbroken chain of Greek nationality. – phoog Nov 14 '23 at 21:41
  • I believe the king is not a British citizen either, is he? All citizens are his subjects, but as the head of state, he is not a subject to his own. – gerrit Nov 15 '23 at 08:15
  • 1
    @ohwilleke Really? Where in the Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act is that enumerated? – Coxy Nov 15 '23 at 13:27
  • 1
    This answer would be improved if it provided a reference for why citizenship and residency are relevant to the statement "Australians are required to vote". – Toivo Säwén Nov 15 '23 at 14:25
  • 4
    @Coxy It is a long standing common law and structural rule in every common law monarchy (and generally speaking, in every monarchy, period). It doesn't need to be written in a statute or constitution. This isn't how legal systems in common law countries work. – ohwilleke Nov 15 '23 at 17:05
  • Is "office" the correct term for referring to the King of Australia? I thought an office is something one must be appointed to, whereas the title of King is something Charles acceded to by birthright. – Will Nov 16 '23 at 08:48
  • 1
    @phoog I meant revoking his UK citizenship. Potential citizenship legally counts as not being stateless here. – Comic Sans Seraphim Nov 16 '23 at 14:06
  • 1
    I'd love to see Charles try to vote illegally in Australia. "No, of course one is not the King. One is Bruce McGillicuddy of Woolamaloo." – DJClayworth Nov 16 '23 at 16:26