It varies from country to country. Rights in a democratic state, whether a constitutional monarchy or a republic will tend to be roughly the same. While each is different, they all guarantee and affirm in their own way the basic rights set out in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights: the freedoms of expression, conscience, assembly, association and movement; the rights to life and liberty; the right not to be subjected to torture or cruel and unusual punishment; and the right to a fair trial, due process and natural justice.
Basically they would have the same rights as in a democratic parliamentary or democratic presidential republic - the rights of a Swede, Canadian or Briton (all living in constitutional monarchies) are similar to those of an US, French or Italian citizen (living in democratic republics). Beyond normal guarantees for individual rights (such as the right to life, property, welfare, freedom of expression, religion, right to information, interdiction of censorship etc. etc.), that are available, each citizen has a set of political rights (like in the US or France). Typically, those in constitutional monarchy elect the legislative body of the country (the parliament or congress or diet or whatever the said country chooses to call it), which in terms elects the executive (the largest party/the coalition of parties that get the majority gets to form a government), which is represented by a prime-minister (same as in the case of parliamentary republics). So, what the president does in the US (or in other presidential republics), the prime minister does in a parliamentary republic or a constitutional monarchy. The only difference between a constitutional monarchy and a parliamentary republic is that the nominal head of state is the king/queen, that is not elected, but that stands only as a figurehead, as an international image of the country (same as the pres. of the US, say) and as a rallying flag in times of trouble. Unlike the president of the US, a parliamentary president or a monarch has no say in the executive or legislative affairs of the country - they must fully obey the choice of the people through the parliament. Of course, the citizens are entitled to criticize the king/queen (newspapers here are full of criticism and/or gossip), and even, if they so choose, depose their monarch by means of a referendum and install a republic instead (for example, in Australia, some parties want that, and have called a referendum, but people chose that they want to be a monarchy for the future). So, in a nutshell, people in a constitutional monarchy have all the rights of people in a democratic presidential or parliamentary republic.
In a republic, citizens typically have rights such as the right to vote, freedom of speech, freedom of religion, and the right to a fair trial. They also have the right to participate in the political process, petition the government, and have equal protection under the law.
Non-citizens in ancient Greece were individuals who were not granted full political rights and privileges in the city-state. This included categories such as slaves, foreigners, and women. Non-citizens did not have the right to participate in the political life of the city-state, such as voting or holding public office.
US citizens are important because they have rights and protections under the Constitution, including the right to vote, access to certain government services, and legal protections. They also play a crucial role in shaping the country's political landscape through voting and civic engagement. Additionally, they contribute to the economy, culture, and society of the United States.
The ERA, or Equal Rights Amendment, is a proposed amendment to the US Constitution aimed at guaranteeing equal legal rights for all American citizens regardless of sex. It seeks to address issues of gender discrimination and ensure equal protection under the law.
The two categories of naturalized citizens are derivative citizens and primary citizens. Derivative citizens acquire citizenship through their parent(s), while primary citizens obtain citizenship through the naturalization process.
It was a monarchy - there was no voting.
The English Bill of Rights was important to English citizens because it enumerates certain rights to which subjectsand perminant residants of a constitutional monarchy were thought to be entitled in the late 17th century.
This form of government is known as an absolute monarchy. In an absolute monarchy, power is passed down through hereditary succession, and the ruler has unrestricted authority over the country and its citizens. This means that citizens have limited or no civil liberties and their rights are largely disregarded.
A monarch does not give rights to citizens. They don't have to since they control everything.
I believe it is a monarchy (monarchies are where kings rule).
English Bill of Rights
The English Bill of Rights was important to English citizens because it enumerates certain rights to which subjectsand perminant residants of a constitutional monarchy were thought to be entitled in the late 17th century.
Why were the French citizens upset with the French monarchy?
It depends on the constitution of the individual country.
Citizens have no rights under a Dictatorship.
Citizens have no rights to participation in an Absolute Monarchy. They have to do whatever the ruler says or pay the consequences. An Absolute Monarchy is in a way like a Dictatorship in the sense of total power.
Citizens were afraid that if the constitution went through without it being added, they might end up being controlled without rights once again like when they were under a monarchy. So they demanded a Bill of Rights, so that their rights may be clearly stated and referred to in case of any troubles between state and peoples.