Members of the Royal Family Line of Succession - Broadest Sense

[Victoria]

Can somebody explain to me how the Danish sucession works. Is Isabella third in line to the throne? if they ever have another prince, would he be third in sucession and Isabella fourth?

[charmed4sure]

she is in 3rd right now after her dad and her brother....the law has not been changed as of yet to allow succession through all heir regardless of sex...but i think it has been voted on unanimously but before it is passed, the bill must also be voted through the next parliament, before being submitted to a change it lawfully and Isabella should stay 3rd no matter how many boys Mary and Fred might have. I am pretty sure that is how it is going now:)

[norwegianne]

The new line of succession after the birth of Isabella is:
1. Frederik
2. Christian
3. Isabella
4. Joachim
5. Nikolai
6. Felix
7. Benedikte
8. Elisabeth

Should Frederik and Mary get a boy before the change in the law, he would come before his older sister. If they get a girl before this, she would come after Isabella.

[Victoria]

Does that mean that if Mary has had a girl before Christian then she wouldn't be the heir but her brother?

[Mandy]

As the constitution stands now, yes, a male heir takes precedence over the female. However, the Danish Parliament were in the process of revising the constitution when Christian was born, so I would imagine, it could have been altered before the birth of the second child, if need be.

[UserDane]

Originally Posted by Mandy

As the constitution stands now, yes, a male heir takes precedence over the female. However, the Danish Parliament were in the process of revising the constitution when Christian was born, so I would imagine, it could have been altered before the birth of the second child, if need be.

They probably wouldn't have had the time to effec the change before the birth of a second child since any change to the constitution has to be approved by two consecutive sitting parliaments and then be approved by 40% of all eligible voters in a referendum. However, I am 100% sure it would have been changed; had Isabella been born first, it would never had been acceptable to the politicians or the public if she had been pushed down the ladder in favour of a younger brother. The prime minister stated this intent in his Constitution speech in 2005 (Venstre - Danmarks Liberale Parti: Anders Fogh Rasmussens grundlovstale - in Danish) where he said amongst other things 'I do not feel that we should let the decision about a change of the succession act depend on whether the crown princess gives birth to a boy or girl in October."
The proposed change was presented on 4th October, 2005, and approved.
In his 2007 Constitution speech (Statsministeriet - Statsminister Anders Fogh Rasmussens grundlovstale 2007 i Fuglsang Park, Toreby og Byparken, Roskilde) Anders Fogh Rasmussen again referred to the change in the succession act and stated that it still needs to be approved by the next parliament as well and then by a referendum.

[Next Star]

Denmark goes by primogenture which means males and their descents go in front of females and their descents regardless how old they are. Before the constitution had been changed in 1972 only males were allowed to inherit the danish throne.

[UserDane]

Originally Posted by Next Star

Denmark goes by primogenture which means males and their descents go in front of females and their descents regardless how old they are. Before the constitution had been changed in 1972 only males were allowed to inherit the danish throne.

Not sure I follow you here; the succession act was changed in 1953 - which was a constitutional change - to enable the then 13 year old Margrethe to succeed her father as regent. That change provided for female regents in the absence of male heirs; the change that is now underway will give men and women equal rights to the throne.

[Next Star]

Okay I got the year wrong no one is perfect.Another thing I know why the Constituiton had been changed because Maragethe II 's late father the king only had daughters being he had no sons he wanted is eldest daughter Maragethe to succeed him as queen if had not changed the law her late uncle Prince Knud would have became king. I know the only way a female can inherit the danish throne if their are not males present in the royal family.

[UserDane]

Originally Posted by Next Star

I know the only way a female can inherit the danish throne if their are not males present in the royal family.

...untill the next Parliament and a referendum that is

[Next Star]

No that is the way it is today. Maragrethe II would not be queen if she had a brother rather he was older or younger males have a stronger claim than females when it comes to the danish throne.

[UserDane]

Originally Posted by Next Star

No that is the way it is today. Maragrethe II would not be queen if she had a brother rather he was older or younger males have a stronger claim than females when it comes to the danish throne.

I am perfectly aware of the succession rules to the throne Next Star; I was just trying to make a half-joking remark that the status quo is about to change - if you read my previous post on the matter you will see that the process is well on it's way. It's a 3-part process to to speak; the first part completed, the next two will be completed in due time if all goes as expected.

[Next Star]

The constituiton has not changed yet that is what I am trying to say. I was just speaking in general about the constitution being that males have a stronger claim than those of females. I also read the parliment is thinking about allowing equal primogenture which would be great.

[UserDane]

Originally Posted by Next Star

The constituiton has not changed yet that is what I am trying to say. I was just speaking in general about the constitution being that males have a stronger claim than those of females. I also read the parliment is thinking about allowing equal primogenture which would be great.

We are talking in circles here; please read my post #47.
Parliament is not thinking about changing the present succession - the first out of 3 steps to actually change the succession act (which amounts to a constitutional change) has actually been carried out!!!

[Next Star]

I read that article months ago just because the law is going through the process of change means it can not be overthrown. I know a majority of those who have the power to change the law can do it if there are enough votes.

[UserDane]

Originally Posted by Next Star

Your not explaining the three ways how the constituiton is being changed and it is confusing me? Tell me what has to be done to change the constiution to make the law change. Thank You

Sorry, I thought you had read the posts from #47 and before where the process was discussed.
To bring about a change of the succession act - which is a constitutional change - it must be approved by two consecutive Parliaments and then by a referendum by 40% of all eligible votes (that is not only out of those who bother to show up at the polling stations!).
So far, this Parliament has approved the change. Nothing further can be done till we get a new Parliament then - which may be either efter the end of the present government's 4 year term or if an election is suddenly called. When the next Parliament has then approved the proposed change, there will be the said referendum.
As you see, a quite lenghty and somewhat bothersome process! It will be done though!

[MargreteI]

Originally Posted by UserDane

Sorry, I thought you had read the posts from #47 and before where the process was discussed.
To bring about a change of the succession act - which is a constitutional change - it must be approved by two consecutive Parliaments and then by a referendum by 40% of all eligible votes (that is not only out of those who bother to show up at the polling stations!).
So far, this Parliament has approved the change. Nothing further can be done till we get a new Parliament then - which may be either efter the end of the present government's 4 year term or if an election is suddenly called. When the next Parliament has then approved the proposed change, there will be the said referendum.
As you see, a quite lenghty and somewhat bothersome process! It will be done though!

Yep, and when the change has been processed by a new government we are likely to have to wait for a new government once more, so that they can process the referendum together with a normal parliament election.

I doubt they will run the risk of setting this referendum up and running on it own, since coutch potatoes who does not vote is very bad. Afterall they need 40 % of all votes to be in favour, as well as the majority of the the vote.

.

[Philippe Egalite']

Originally Posted by Next Star

Denmark goes by primogenture which means males and their descents go in front of females and their descents regardless how old they are. Before the constitution had been changed in 1972 only males were allowed to inherit the danish throne.

As the word primogeniture implies (first born), the first-born child, irrespective of sex inherits wealth, estate, throne or other office or rank or title. Absolute Primogeniture is now applied in Sweden (since 1980), Netherlands (since 1983), Norway (since 1990) and Belgium (since 1991).

There are also other types of primogeniture:
1. Agnatic Primogeniture. Inheritance according to seniority of birth, to the total exclusion of females (Salic law). For example, this was the case in Denmark until 1953. During the 19th century, most monarchies in Europe practised this law of succession, but is now extinct. This was the reason, in fact, that Luxembourg split from The Netherlands.

2. Cognatic Primogeniture. Male-preference primogeniture, where a younger brother takes over an older sister. A female, however, can still inherit the throne, if she has NO living brothers or deceased brothers with surviving children. This system applies still in Great Britain, Spain, Denmark (since 1953) and was also the case in Sweden until 1980. In Sweden, prince Carl Philip, although younger than princess Victoria, was crown prince for a short while. But the Swedish government and parliament changed the Rule to Absolute Primogeniture, thus allowing the first-born, princess Victoria to become crown princess.

3. Agnatic Cognatic Primogeniture. Females can inherit only if all eligible males are extinct. Example, the daughter of a sovereign may inherit the throne, if she has no living brothers or deceased brothers with son(s) and no living brothers or sons of brothers of her father are available either. This system is currently in effect in Luxembourg.

[Philippe Egalite']

Originally Posted by norwegianne

The new line of succession after the birth of Isabella is:
1. Frederik
2. Christian
3. Isabella
4. Joachim
5. Nikolai
6. Felix
7. Benedikte
8. Elisabeth

Should Frederik and Mary get a boy before the change in the law, he would come before his older sister. If they get a girl before this, she would come after Isabella.

It depends on whether the new Act will be retroactive or not.

Example in case # 1: In Norway, Crown Prince Haakon was born in 1973 while Princess Martha had been born two years earlier (1971). The new law, of absolute primogeniture was introduced in 1990. However, because Prince Haakon had been raised until that time (for 17 years) as crown Prince it was deemed unfair to retroactively effect the law. So, Haakon remains Crown Prince despite the new law. Had Princess Martha and Prince Haakon been born exactly 20 years laters, SHE would be now the Crown Princess.

Example in case #2: In Sweden, Prince Carl Philip was born after Princess Victoria but became Crown Prince due to cognatic primogeniture at the time. When the new law was passed, converting cognatic to absolute primogeniture and retroactively so, Carl Philip ceased to be Crown Prince and Victoria became the Heir to the throne, in fact, to the protest and disappointment of the King.

[Philippe Egalite']

Originally Posted by GömdNatt

Anne-Marie married the then King of the Hellenes. This took her out of the line of succession and that includes her issues.

This is correct. By marrying a foreign dynast, former queen Anne-Marie of the Hellenes, has lost not only her right of succession to the Danist Throne but, also, her rank and title. Thus, she is no more princess til Danmark , but because she was born a princess of Denmark prior to the introduction of the Act (1953) she may, by courtesy, be referred to as princess af Danmark.
Similarly, former King Constantine of the Hellenes, was born (1940) prince of Greece and til Danmark, as a direct patrilinear descendant of King Christian IX. But, since the introduction of the Act of 1953, he has lost his rank and title and may only by courtesy be referred to as prince af Danmark.

Because they were all born after 1953, the children of Constantine and Anne-Marie are not princes or princesses of Denmark in any way, type or form, not even by courtesy. In fact, it would be disrespectful of the Constitution of Denmark for anyone to address them as such.