The Crown Prince chaired a session of the Council of Ministers in his capacity as Deputy King, in accordance with Article (28) of the Constitution, which organized the deputyship when the King leaves the country. It stipulated that if the King intends to leave the country, he shall appoint a deputy or a body of deputyship by royal decree before his departure to exercise his powers during his absence. The Constitution also required the Deputy King, before assuming his duties, to take the constitutional oath before the Council of Ministers, after which he shall, as a general rule, exercise all powers related to the throne during the period of deputyship.
In this context, the Constitution outlined the nature of the relationship between the King and the executive authority and the position of the Council of Ministers therein. Article (26) stipulated that the executive authority is vested in the King and exercised through his ministers in accordance with the provisions of the Constitution, while Article (41) stipulated that the Council of Ministers consists of the Prime Minister as President and a number of ministers as needed and in the public interest.
From these texts, it is clear that the constitutional legislator vested the executive authority in the King, but did not consider him a member of the Council of Ministers, which the Constitution defined its composition as the Prime Minister as President and a number of ministers. Accordingly, the presidency of the King or his deputy during travel to the sessions of the Council of Ministers does not change the constitutional composition of the Council, nor does it make the King or his deputy a part of the government in the constitutional sense.
This distinction is also based on the nature of the constitutional responsibility, as Article (30) of the Constitution stipulated that the King is the head of state and is immune from any liability and responsibility, while Article (51) stipulated that the Prime Minister and ministers are responsible before the House of Representatives for the general policy of the state, and each minister for the affairs of his ministry. Considering the King a member of the Council of Ministers does not conform with his constitutional position or with the rules of ministerial responsibility.
This is further reinforced by Article (49) that the King's oral or written orders do not exempt the ministers from their responsibility, and Article (48) that the decisions of the Council of Ministers are signed by the Prime Minister and the ministers, and their implementation falls on them each within the limits of his competence. These provisions constitute additional constitutional indications that the King, or his deputy when traveling, is not part of the Council of Ministers, and that the royal directives do not transfer the constitutional responsibility from the ministers or replace their competencies, but rather the government remains responsible for translating them into policies, decisions, and executive procedures.
In the latter case, Prince Hussein bin Abdullah II did not chair a session of the Council of Ministers as Crown Prince, but as Deputy King after taking the constitutional oath. The title of Crown Prince is related to the system of succession to the throne, while the title of Deputy King is related to the exercise of royal powers during the period of deputyship, without resulting in a change in the constitutional nature of the Council of Ministers or the transfer of government responsibilities to it.
In conclusion, the chairmanship of the King or his deputy of a session of the Council of Ministers embodies the constitutional relationship between the head of state and the government, and allows direct access to national files and their follow-up and guidance on priorities, without leading to confusion between the constitutional position of each of them, with the competence in managing state affairs and the political responsibility for formulating policies and implementing decisions remaining with the Council of Ministers and ministers, thereby maintaining the balance drawn by the Constitution between exercising powers and bearing responsibility for them.
* Professor of Constitutional Law at the Faculty of Law, Jordan University
