Sir, - One of the characteristics of the debate on Ireland rejoining the Commonwealth, as reflected in a number of articles and letters in The Irish Times last November nd December, was the misapprehension that it was in some sense a British institution. As this week is the 50th anniversary of the modern Commonwealth, this clearly represents a timely opportunity to reiterate the fact that the Commonwealth is not British and to explain why this is so.
On April 27th, 1949, exactly 50 years ago this week, Commonwealth Prime Ministers adopted the London Declaration. That agreement reconciled republicanism with continued membership of the Commonwealth, which transformed the association into a group of fully sovereign countries. Thirty-three of the 54 members are currently republics and a number of others are contemplating becoming republics.
The London Declaration represented a momentous decision by the eight countries which at that time constituted the Commonwealth - namely Australia, Britain, Canada, Ceylon (as Sri Lanka then was), India, New Zealand, Pakistan and South Africa. It transformed its character from a relic of the British Empire into a co-operative association of free and independent nations. It was then that it ceased to be "The British Commonwealth" and became "The Commonwealth".
The modern Commonwealth is an association of equals, with no centre and no periphery. While member countries have decided that Queen Elizabeth should be recognised as "the symbol of the free association of independent sovereign countries and, as such, Head of the Commonwealth", this does not imply that Britain has a special or leading role in the association. While it is a valued member of the Commonwealth, it is no more (and, of course, no less) important than any of the 53 other member countries. - Yours, etc.,
Derek Ingram, Wyndham Mews, London W1.