Southern Rhodesia Act 1965

The Southern Rhodesia Act 1965 c. 76 was an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom. It was designed to reaffirm British legal rule in Southern Rhodesia after Rhodesia had unilaterally declared independence. In practice, it only enforced the status of Southern Rhodesia as a British colony in British constitutional theory as the Rhodesian government did not recognise it.[1]

Southern Rhodesia Act 1965
Act of Parliament
Long titleAn Act to make further provision with respect to Southern Rhodesia
Citationc. 76
Territorial extentSouthern Rhodesia and the United Kingdom
Dates
Royal assent16 November 1965
Commencement16 November 1965
Repealed18 April 1980
Other legislation
Repealed byZimbabwe Act 1979
Status: Repealed
Text of statute as originally enacted
Text of the Southern Rhodesia Act 1965 as in force today (including any amendments) within the United Kingdom, from legislation.gov.uk.

History
Government recognised flag of Southern Rhodesia

On 11 November 1965, the Prime Minister of Southern Rhodesia Ian Smith declared Rhodesia's Unilateral Declaration of Independence from the British Empire after the British Government refused to grant independence with White minority rule was still in place.[2] Within five days, the Southern Rhodesia Act 1965 had passed through Parliament and had received royal assent from Queen Elizabeth II.[3] The Southern Rhodesia Act 1965 stated that Southern Rhodesia was still legally a British colony and affirmed to the Queen the power to govern Southern Rhodesia via Orders in Council including amending the constitution and enforce legal restrictions upon them unilaterally.[4]

Effect

The first use of the Act was when the Queen issued an Order-in-Council to suspend the Southern Rhodesian Constitution and legally sacked the Rhodesian Front government.[5] The Act was intended to show that the British Government alone had authority in Southern Rhodesia in theory. However, in practice, the act was largely ignored in Rhodesia and the government continued to meet as they considered that it was in violation of the constitutional convention that the British Parliament did not legislate for Southern Rhodesia.[6] Though they initially maintained allegiance to Queen Elizabeth II as Queen of Rhodesia, in 1970 they declared themselves a republic after the Queen refused to recognise the title.[7] In 1978, when Southern Rhodesia proposed an Internal Settlement to instigate black majority rule, the United Nations rejected it.[8] The Act was repealed by the Zimbabwe Act 1979 after Rhodesia voluntarily returned to its former status as a British colony in order for multiracial elections and the eventual independence of Zimbabwe.[9]

gollark: It's spelt "stonks", not "stocks".
gollark: You could do better things, such as purchasing a premium osmarks.tk subscription.
gollark: "hmm yes I will spend several tens of thousands of £ demonstrating to a few random people that I have money" - mostly idiots.
gollark: It's a very expensive reminder.
gollark: How many regularly-visited-by-competent-mathematicians websites which are vulnerable to apiotakeover using 1337 h4xx are there?

References
  1. "Southern Rhodesia Act 1965". Legislation.gov. Retrieved 2018-03-09.
  2. "Zimbabwe profile". BBC News. 2018-02-15. Retrieved 2018-03-09.
  3. "Southern Rhodesia Act 1965" (PDF). National Archives. Retrieved 2018-03-09 – via CVCE. Cite journal requires |journal= (help)
  4. "United Kingdom: Southern Rhodesia Act 1965". JSTOR 20690038. Cite journal requires |journal= (help)
  5. "Financing Rebellion: The Rhodesian State Financial Policy and Exchange Control 1962-1979" (PDF). University of the Free State. Retrieved 2018-03-09. Cite journal requires |journal= (help)
  6. Ryan, Mark (2014). Unlocking Constitutional and Administrative Law. Routledge. p. 160. ISBN 1444179624.
  7. The International and Comparative Law Quarterly, Volume 20, page 659, 1971
  8. "Resolution 423(1978)". United Nations. Retrieved 2018-03-09.
  9. "Zimbabwe Act 1979". Legislation.gov.uk. Retrieved 2018-03-09.
This article is issued from Wikipedia. The text is licensed under Creative Commons - Attribution - Sharealike. Additional terms may apply for the media files.