It seems fair that the monarch would have some influence over laws that affect them (especially farther back in the past). It seems reasonable for the king to b

It seems fair that the monarch would have some influence over laws that affect them (especially farther back in the past). It seems reasonable for the king to be able to veto an act of Parliament that unilaterally confiscates the king's lands and/or income. How far that the veto should extend is a matter of policy, but the veto itself is not a sign of corruption.