King Charles' ascension to the throne means parliament will now have to be granted his permission if they wish to discuss anything that could affect him directly.
Having succeeded his late mother Queen Elizabeth II following her sad passing earlier this month, Charles has already been pictured meeting Prime Minister Liz Truss, as well as sorting through documents in the monarch's red box, which can often contain government papers which require a signature.
Charles will now have final say over matters and legislation that involves him and MPs will need to notify him and require his consent before proceeding with talks regarding any plans that could potentially impact him or the state. However, Buckingham Palace insist that consent "has not been withheld" in recent times, with the law stretching back to the 1700s.
READ MORE: Meghan Markle's dad hopes Queen's funeral will heal rift with estranged daughter
The royal family's website reads: "It is also a long established convention that The Monarch is asked by Parliament to provide consent (which is different to assent) for the debating of bills which would affect the prerogative or interests of the Crown.
"Where The Monarch’s Consent is given it is signified in each House of Parliament and recorded in Hansard. Consent has not been withheld in modern times, except on the advice of Government."
The Guardian previously reported that the secretive procedure was used more than 1000 times during the Queen's reign to vet various laws ranging from justice to social security, race relations, and even things like car parking charges.
Following their investigation into documents from the National Archives, The Guardian also claimed The Queen used the controversial law to privately lobby the government. In addition, their evidence suggests the procedure was cited by The Queen to convince ministers to amend a law to help conceal her private wealth from the public back in the 1970s.
The law has seemingly been used more frequently by the royal family than many had previously perceived. Last year, they withstood a legal challenge from The Guardian to make Prince Philip's will public knowledge, keeping the details secret for 90 years.
The royal family play down the importance of the procedure, but its continued existence has come under criticism from campaigners.
Republic campaign in favour of abolishing the monarchy, with chief executive Graham Smith stating last year: "This represents a systematic abuse of power by the royals that goes back decades, using a little-known parliamentary rule to ensure that laws the rest of us must abide by don't apply to them.
"Because of this consent rule senior royals are exempt from race discrimination laws, environmental protection laws, planning laws and much, much more.
"In a democracy we must all be equal in law. Clearly that's not the case in the UK."
To keep up to date with all the latest news stories, make sure you sign up to one of our newsletters here .
READ NEXT:
