THE confusion triggered by the Prince of Wales’s marriage to Camilla Parker Bowles could precipitate a new wave of republicanism across Britain’s former colonies and jeopardise the future monarch’s chances of becoming head of the Commonwealth.

As the debate rages over whether Mrs Parker Bowles will become Queen Camilla, the issue has caused deep concern among some of the 15 sovereign countries around the world who still recognise the British monarch as their head of state.

Joel Kibazo, spokesman for the Commonwealth Secretariat, which is prepared to offer legal and technical advice to its members on the constitutional implications of the marriage, said: “We understand that some of the states concerned do want to know what their options are.

“We do know that one or two want out.”

While the debate in Britain has centred on what title the future wife of the King will bear, the overwhelming view of constitutional experts overseas is that she will be Queen Camilla, wife of King Charles, when he ascends the throne.

The implications could be serious for the monarchy. Apart from a wave of republicanism, the change in attitude further damages the likelihood of Prince Charles taking the leadership of the Commonwealth, at present headed by his mother.

“It is not automatic that Prince Charles will become head of the Commonwealth,” the Commonwealth spokesman said. “It will be decided by the leaders of the 53 member states. It is not something that needs to be addressed now.”

A sounding of opinions among member states suggests that the mood is not favourable for the Prince and that most members would prefer to make a break with the monarchy and choose a leader from another country.

Certainly, the impending royal wedding has reignited the debate in Australia, which voted by 55 per cent to 45 per cent six years ago in a referendum to keep the Queen as head of state — but only, it was claimed at the time, because the alternative offered by John Howard, the pro-monarchist Prime Minister, was a president picked by an electoral college of the country’s healthily despised politicians.

In an article in The Australian newspaper yesterday, headlined “Off with an English head of state”, Allison Henry, director of the Australian Republican Movement, said that “the prospect of a future King Charles and Queen Camilla has reminded Australians about the unfinished business of our republic”.

The Republican Movement has recorded a steep rise in membership in recent weeks after a lacklustre royal visit by the Prince and the doubts raised by his marriage. Two recent opinion polls revealed that slightly more than half of Australians favoured becoming a republic. The figures increased when people were asked about the Prince becoming their head of state.

“Our next head of state is set to be Charles Philip Arthur George Windsor of London, England, whether we like it or not. And if you believe those latest reports out of London, right by his side will be Queen Camilla,” Ms Henry wrote. “These decisions are being implemented on the other side of the world, in accordance with arcane and discriminatory laws, with no input from Australian citizens.”

New Zealand has also signalled that it will follow the republican path. “I can see a future where New Zealand will select its own head of state,” Helen Clark, the Prime Minister, said during Prince Charles’s visit to the country. She added, however, that the decision would not be taken soon.

In the Caribbean, where the Queen is recognised as head of state in 12 nations, Jamaica and Barbados are already taking steps to become republics.

The constitutional ambiguity caused by the marriage could accelerate that process and persuade other Caribbean nations to follow suit. Barbados is the furthest along that route after Owen Arthur, the Prime Minister, proposed saying goodbye to the Queen earlier this year. A referendum is expected to be held this summer and campaigning is just getting under way.

In Jamaica, P. J. Patterson, the Prime Minister, came out in support of a republican form of government at his party’s annual conference in September 2002 and wants to enact the change before general elections in two years’ time.

“Our position has always been based not so much on the personality of any individual, but on our constitutional relationship with the Queen as an institution and our head of state,” Senator Burchell Whiteman, the Jamaican Minister of Information, said.

One of the largest islands, with a population of 2.7 million, republican sentiment was growing stronger in Jamaica, especially among the young, he said. Having to address the issue of a King Charles and Queen Camilla was “a new development that certainly would heighten interest”.

“I’m sure the matter [of republicanism] will now get greater consideration,” Mr Whiteman told The Times.

Some countries are likely to remain loyal to the Crown, however. Canada, which is opposed to American-style republicanism, remains strongly pro-monarchy.

So do the Bahamas and Belize, the Central American nation which relies on a British military presence to protect it against its larger neighbour, Honduras.

Even on the tiny twin-island nation of St Kitts and Nevis, with a population of less than 40,000, Erasmus Williams, the Government’s press secretary, said that Mrs Parker Bowles’s status was not a big issue.

“I doubt it will make a difference. We are quite monarchical right now,” he said.

DEBATE
Is the marriage damaging the monarchy? e-mail debate@thetimes.co.uk

Explore UK News

• Crime News

• Education News

• Health News

• Scotland News

Times Recommends

• What makes the perfect mum?
• To keep me stress-free, no more awareness days, please
• What do lottery winners buy?