A 
short while ago we wrote about the fact Queen
Elizabeth II needs neither a passport nor
driving license thanks to a quirk of British
law.
But what other powers does the Queen of many
titles have and what could she theoretically
do if she decided to flex the full might of
the authority she wields?
As it turns out, thanks to the Royal Prerogative,
a terrifying amount if she really felt like
it, or, at least, assuming parliament went
by the letter of the law and they and the
people didn’t decide to stage a little revolt.
In reality, the Queen rarely exerts even a
fraction of the power she theoretically wields
as it’s kept in check by the only person
in the UK who can tell her what to do- herself.
This is very much a calculated move on her
part in order to stay in the good graces of
her subjects (as is voluntarily paying taxes
even though she’s technically not obligated
to).
Not only does she avoid openly flexing her
political might, she also tends to keep her
opinions outside of the public sphere.
As historian Frank Prochaska notes,
The real secret of royal influence is saying
nothing.
And anything the Queen does say publicly,
is pretty anodyne.
The minute a monarch, or any of the royals
say anything remotely political or opinionated,
they alienate people and they lose some power.
This silence played a large part in how the
British monarchy survived post World War One,
when other European royal families didn’t.
In fact, for almost two decades now the monarchy
has regularly had polls run and focus groups
put together to keep track of how the general
public feels about them and their various
actions.
They also have on payroll individuals whose
job it is to ensure the Queen stays in the
public eye and in a way that is most likely
to endear her to her subjects- as with politicians
who rely on the voting public, with each public
change she presents, right down to carrying
a cell phone or not, carefully calculated
in terms of the impact it might have.
While this may seem only self-serving, the
Queen has a very lengthy track record as an
admirable public servant and is also acutely
aware that she is a prominent public face
representing her subjects, so is keen on avoiding
being viewed in a bad light lest she in turn
paint them in a bad light by her actions.
As she noted at the tender age of 21 in a
speech to the Commonwealth she gave on her
birthday,
I declare before you all that my whole life
whether it be long or short shall be devoted
to your service and the service of our great
imperial family to which we all belong.
Surprisingly, for many years the full extent
of exactly what powers the Queen handed off
to the government, but technically retained,
weren’t publicly known.
That is, until 2003, when the government released
a partial list of the things it can do on
the Queen’s behalf.
For the most part, the list confirmed that
the government could do things to save the
Queen time, such as issue or revoke passports
which simply wouldn’t be a feasible thing
to be the sole prerogative of the Crown in
a modern society.
However, many things were quite worrying to
some, such as her ability to declare war,
which under the rules of Royal Prerogative
can be done without consulting parliament.
On top of that, the Queen is totally immune
from prosecution and is considered above the
law in the UK.
And as a head of state, she enjoys diplomatic
immunity in any foreign country she happens
to visit.
As such, she could commit any crime conceivable
anywhere on Earth and, at least as the law
currently stands, suffer no consequence for
doing so.
However, as with everything, she’s generally
exceptionally careful to ensure she doesn’t
break any laws.
Of course, what she does in private is completely
her own affair, despite her prominent political
position, as she is exempt from Freedom of
Information requests.
Moving on- because technically speaking “the
people of Britain are not citizens, but subjects
of the monarch” she could have anyone she
wanted arrested and presumably seize their
property or land for the crown.
Speaking of which, the Queen owns all of the
sea beds around the UK and can commandeer
any ship found in British waters “for service
to the realm”.
Oddly enough, she also has first dibs on any
whales that wash up on shore.
The Queen could also administer any manner
of punishment to an individual who offended
or otherwise displeased her as the crown has
“prerogative power to keep the peace within
the realm”.
And since she’s immune from prosecution,
nobody could really do anything if this punishment
wasn’t entirely within the scope of the
law.
If the government tried to stop her, the Queen
could decimate the British political landscape
by dissolving parliament and appointing anyone
she felt like as prime minister.
This is because it’s the Queen’s duty
to appoint the prime minister and she could,
in theory appoint anyone she wanted to the
position, regardless of the way the British
public voted in an election.
On top of that, in the event the Queen didn’t
like the outcome of an election, for instance
if she didn’t like the replacement parliament
members voted in, she could just call for
another one using Royal Prerogative until
she got the parliament she wanted.
Not that she’d need to, because she could
just bring in the army to keep everyone in
line if she so chose.
How?
Well, the Queen is also the Commander-in-Chief
of the entire British military with every
officer, soldier, sailor and pilot swearing
allegiance to the Crown and nobody else.
They’re not called Her Majesty’s Armed
Forces for nothing.
Noted as being the “ultimate authority”
on all British military matters, the Queen
could authorise a nuclear strike on France
or make North Korea an ally as she has the
power to declare both war and peace with foreign
nations.
As for laws, while technically the Queen can’t
create new laws, as she can only sign them
into law after they’re decided upon by parliament
(in fact, her Royal Assent is required to
make the law official after being passed by
parliament in the first place), she could
appoint ministers who’d make any laws she
wanted a reality and then just sign them into
law that way.
Beyond Royal Assent, there’s also the Queen’s
consent, which requires she give her consent
before any law that affects the interests
of the monarchy can even be discussed at all
in parliament.
(She actually has used this power before,
such as in 1999 when she refused to allow
the discussion of a bill that would have given
parliament power to authorize military strikes
in Iraq, instead of needing her authorization.)
So that’s on the political side- it doesn’t
stop here.
The Queen technically has a sort of power
not only over her subjects’ physical beings,
but also their souls.
How?
She’s the head of the Church of England,
including having the power to appoint Archbishops
and power over many other such matters concerning
the church.
As for most of these powers that technically
allow her to rule with an iron fist, as previously
mentioned, the Queen is hesitant to ever use
them in such a way that would displease her
subjects and certainly isn’t about to disregard
their representatives in parliament.
However, these powers still exist for a variety
of reasons including potentially being needed
in a time of extreme crisis where an individual
ruling unilaterally for the good of her people
can potentially be of benefit- one of the
few scenarios her subjects might not mind
her flexing her political muscles a bit without
necessarily consulting parliament, depending
on the circumstances.
That said, just because she isn’t in the
practice of exercising her powers against
the will of the people, it doesn’t mean
she isn’t occasionally an active political
powerhouse in private.
Extremely well respected and known worldwide,
with the ability to bend the ear of most heads
of state, the influence the Queen wields is
difficult to quantify, but, as noted in an
article discussing why the BBC named the Queen
the most powerful woman in the world in their
list of 100 most powerful women,
Her Majesty’s power is more about influence
– a discreet nod of the head, a polite word
in the ear of a Prime Minister at their weekly
meeting, or a strategic patronage of a cause
being overlooked by the Government – is
how she can indirectly effect our world without
us even knowing.
To conclude, the Queen has many powers she
could theoretically legally use to her own
ends unless her subjects and parliament simply
decided to stage a revolt.
However, she generally avoids doing anything
overt that might upset her subjects, and otherwise
simply works in the background more or less
in an advisory role when she feels there 
is need.
