A commonwealth is a traditional English term for a political community founded for the

common good. Historically, it has been synonymous with "republic". The noun
"commonwealth", meaning "public welfare, general good or advantage", dates from the 15th
century. Originally a phrase (the common-wealth or the common wealth echoed in the modern
synonym "public wealth"), it comes from the old meaning of "wealth", which is "well-being",
and is itself a loose translation of the Latin res publica (republic).

According to Boon (2007), The term literally meant "common well-being". In the 17th century,
the definition of "commonwealth" expanded from its original sense of "public welfare" or
"commonweal" to mean "a state in which the supreme power is vested in the people; a
republic or democratic state".

The term evolved to become a title to a number of political entities. Three countries Australia,
the Bahamas, and Dominica – have the official title "Commonwealth", as do four U.S. states and
two U.S. territories. Since the early 20th century, the term has been used to name some
fraternal associations of states, most notably the Commonwealth of Nations, an organisation
primarily of former territories of the British Empire. The organisation is not to be confused with
the realms of the Commonwealth.

It is sometimes said that the British Empire was acquired by Britain „in a fit of absence of mind‟.
Certainly, for the most part, its member countries were collected according to no well-planned
strategy to dominate the world. The disparate members of the Commonwealth were acquired
for varying reasons, including trade, settlement and exploration, rivalry with other empires and
sometimes through deliberate conquest or for convenience.

In the result, the Commonwealth, like the empire before it, covers about a quarter of the
world‟s land surface and more than a quarter of its population. To understand where the
Commonwealth is and where it may be going, we must start with its origins. Many of its
essential links are historical, for with the history came connections of language, institutions and
interests.
Fifty-four independent nations freely associate in the Commonwealth of Nations. All but two of
them (Mozambique (1954) and Rwanda (2009)) were at some stage, bound together in varying
forms of allegiance to the British Crown. The admissions of Mozambique and Rwanda wre
exceptional. And yet, not every past colony or possession of Britain is a member of the
Commonwealth. Thus, Hanover (and if one goes back further, parts of France) were once
historically bound in allegiance to the British monarch. Yet they are not part of the
Commonwealth and never have been. Nor is the United States of America, which, in 1781,
prevailed in its War of Independence against Britain: upholding the right of its people to enjoy
basic liberties in its territories that were enjoyed by British subjects at home.

According to Boex (2008). That war was the have a profound influence on the long-term
evolution of democracy and civil rights in the countries of the Commonwealth of Nations. The
British Crown learnt, sometimes slowly and reluctantly, from its mistakes. Other lands over
which the Union Jack once flew have either opted out of membership of the Commonwealth
(such as Burma); have not seen the idea advance to decision (such as Palestine, modern Israel
and Yemen); or have not so far pursued the idea (such as the one time Anglo-Egyptian Sudan,
Jordan, Aden etc.).

Two countries of the Commonwealth have witnessed their membership suspended because of
democracy or human rights defaults (Zimbabwe (1994) and the Fiji Islands (2009)). One hopes
that one day, on proper terms, they will rejoin. Also to be hoped is a restoration of the
membership of Ireland, which was associated as a dominion of the Crown between 1931 and
1949. As the pain of past history is softened by time, the restoration of Irish membership would
be an important achievement. Domestic constitutionalism.

Coinciding with the Reform Bills in the nineteenth century and the extension of the franchise in
the United Kingdom, came ideas for a greater freedom for the dominions and territories of the
Crown. There is no doubt that the demands of the American colonists, in the revolution of
1776, left a profound impact on the minds of British statesmen. The first dominion to achieve
substantial independence was Canada (1867) It was followed by the Commonwealth of
Australia (1901), the Union of South Africa (1909), and New Zealand (1910).
And in 1931, the Statute of Westminster was enacted (22 Geo 5 Ch 4) stating that “the Crown is
the symbol of the free association of the members of the British Commonwealth of Nation.
united by common allegiance to the Crown”. The slow moves towards representative
democracy in India began in 1909. India came to full independence in 1947 with partition of the
sub-continent into India and Pakistan. The speed with which, eventually, almost all of the
former colonies and territories of Britain achieved full independence was undoubtedly
hastened by the impact of the two world wars and their drain upon the manpower, treasure
and will of the British people to maintain their vast imperial sway. Coinciding with these
developments was the creation of the United Nations Organisation in 1945 by a Charter that
proclaimed notions of self-determination of peoples and fundamental human rights.

In addition to the specific professional and governmental bodies, and the regular meetings of
ministers of Commonwealth nations who hold similar governmental portfolios, some of the civil
society organisations that have flourished within the Commonwealth have a broad general
focus that lays emphasis on shared experience. Thus, the Royal Commonwealth Society (RCS),
in whose premises this lecture is given, plays an important function in stimulating and
maintaining the links that exist within the Commonwealth. Most importantly, in recent times,
the RCS has taken a lead in exploring attitudes of Commonwealth citizens, and their knowledge,
concerning the Commonwealth; their criticisms of present arrangements; and their suggestions
for ways in which the Commonwealth links might be strengthened.

Conclusion will be that the Commonwealth is not an anachronism but a useful international
association of independent nations with links of history, language, law, education, science and
civil communities. However, recent instances indicate a need for the Commonwealth to be
more active in upholding the oft proclaimed commitment of its members to the core values
that define the essential reasons for its continued existence. Those values include a
commitment to democracy, to human rights, to tolerance, respect and understanding, and to
principles of governance largely inherited from the tradition that originally developed here in
London.
 REFERENCES

BOCONGO (2008). Local governance barometer report, Botswana. Botswana: BOCONGO.

Boex, J. (2004). Strengthening the allocation of sectoral block grants within Tanzania’s budget
process. Technical memorandum. Oxford university press.

Boex, J. (2008). A report on inter-governmental fiscal relations in Mozambique. Maputo:

Boon, S. (2007). How not to decentralize: Accountability and representation in health boards
in Tanzania.The Hague:SNV Publications.

Braathen, E (2001). Can a patrimonial democracy survive The case of Mozambique, Forum for
Development Studie.

Brillantes, (2002). ‘Decentralisation: An overview’. In Decentralisation and power shift: An