The Royal Forums

The Royal Forums (http://www.theroyalforums.com/forums/)
-   Grand Duke Henri and Grand Duchess Maria Teresa (http://www.theroyalforums.com/forums/f183/)
-   -   Review of the Luxembourg Constitution; April 2009 (http://www.theroyalforums.com/forums/f183/review-of-the-luxembourg-constitution-april-2009-a-21203.html)

Lalla Meriem 04-22-2009 01:20 AM

Review of the Luxembourg Constitution; April 2009
 
Well the review of the constitution that was created by Henri's refusal to sign this bill seems to be coming together. Wort has an article parts of the new constitution. It seems unclear whether or not there will be referendums on some parts of it or all of it.

I was just reading in Wort that article 42 of the proposed new Constitution will alter the succession to the throne. Succession will no longer be governed by the Nassau family pact it will be based on the constitution. Succession under the proposed new constitution will be bases solely on order of birth within legitimate marriages. Gender will no longer play a role. I assume Princess Alexandra will acquire a place above Prince Sebastian but that the rights of Henri's sisters will not be changed (given that Henri is not the eldest child). I'm not sure if headship of the House of Nassau will remain based on male primogeniture because the headship of the house would remain based on the Nassau Family Pact unless altered by the GD. The constitution wouldn't really alter that but I believe that the family and the GD would want the headship to remain with the GD crown.

GD Henri will also lose all power. He will have only a ceremonial role. He will also no longer appoint judges. The government will appoint judges. Which seems unnecessary to me considering that the GD only ever appointed those judges recommened to him by the government.

LadyLeana 04-22-2009 02:15 PM

Well, it's nice to see they also change the succession so that gender does not play any role (long due, imo, but anyway)
But I think they will include something like in Belgium, that it only works for those born after a certain date, or only from the current GD's children onwards. Surely they will not suddenly take away his crown (insofar the GD has one) and turn to his eldest sister instead.

Is there an online version of this article, Lalla Mariem?

Lalla Meriem 04-22-2009 03:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LadyLeana (Post 924845)
Well, it's nice to see they also change the succession so that gender does not play any role (long due, imo, but anyway)
But I think they will include something like in Belgium, that it only works for those born after a certain date, or only from the current GD's children onwards. Surely they will not suddenly take away his crown (insofar the GD has one) and turn to his eldest sister instead.

Is there an online version of this article, Lalla Mariem?


Of course, there is an online version of an article. I read wort.lu everyday. I do not live in Luxembourg so if there is a print version I cannot access it. I order magazines from Luxembourg in the mail but for daily news it's wort.lu and rtl.lu plus the dozens of English language Luxembourg news websites. I should put together a list for other members and post it sometime. The specific article can be found either on the front page by scrolling down or by accessing this link.

I Henri will remain head of state even after they change the succession. There have been no moves to remove Henri as Grand Duke, and it is unlikely that there will be. Being the world's only Grand Duchy is a enormous selling point and you can't be a Grand Duchy without a Grand Duke. The government and most of the people know how valuable their Grand Ducal Family is. Henri has taken the oath and has been sworn in. I assume the change in the succession will begin with the descendants of Henri. It is the only logical way and I'm sure the government has the same the thoughts we do on the matter. I do think, however, that there will be a provision for the descendants of the female line further back than Henri (his sisters or aunts) in the event that Henri's line should ever become extinct (which is unlikely given he has 5 healthy children).

The Grand Duke (current and future) will be 100% removed from the legislative process. He will not even need to sign laws into force anymore. His position will be much like the King of Sweden. He will remain head of state, naturally, but it is as a figure head only. Which is in line with what Henri said he preferred for himself and his son following the discussion on his role. All bills submitted by the Grand Duke must be countersigned (which already was the process). The only bill I can imagine a Grand Duke needing to submit ever is for consent of marriage for a member of the family.

On another note I was reading Henri's speeches and watching his speeches on the official website. Henri speaks so softly and clearly. I find his voice to be terribly reassuring and comforting. I can't imagine ever being intimidated or uncomfortable around him if he were speaking to you.


Additional info in English found here.

LadyLeana 04-23-2009 01:29 PM

Oh, I wasn't suggesting they would depose him or anything, sorry if I gave that impression. :flowers:

I wonder about that provision should his line ever become extinct. This is an interesting thought. I believe in Belgium there's no such distinction made. All descendants in female line from Leopold I down have no rights to the throne whatsoever (I'm pretty sure of that). Of course, in Belgium, when the law was changed, there was guaranteed succession up to the second generation down from Albert, since Princess Astrid already had two or three kids by then.

Tnx for the link, Lalla Mariem! And I agree about the GD's voice ;)

sgl 04-23-2009 04:25 PM

I am pleased to hear that the new constitution is proposing the inclusion of females in succession. IMO, it is rather outdated to exclude female heirs. I see that they also kept children from illegitimate marriage out of succession. Will this exclude the second child of Louis and Tessy? He was born and conceived after the marriage, I believe.

LadyLeana 04-23-2009 05:10 PM

I didn't think prince Louis and his children were in line for succession, because of the kids and the marriage.

Well, getting permission for a wedding these days is more or less a formality (probably), but because of the child born out of wedlock, I don't think Louis and his children will be restored to the succession line. It wouldn't be very fair towards the eldest, would it?

Lalla Meriem 04-23-2009 05:16 PM

Prince Louis voluntarily (supposedly) gave up his succession rights for himself and his descendants prior to his marriage to Tessy. Neither of their children have any place in the succession nor will any future children they may have.

It's probably a good idea to keep the throne with legitimate children. Our dear Luxembourg family has a history of illegitimate children and fiance's who are pregnant at the time of marriage (ex. Jean, Louis, Charles). Allowing illegitimate children places in the succession raises all sorts of problems that should be avoided most especially where the parents may not have had a close relationship to begin with (Albert of Monaco's example comes to mind).

I tend to agree that seeking consent is a formality but a necessary one, IMHO. I'm certain that all the members of the family would know if their choice of spouse had some skeleton in their closet that would make them an unacceptable Princess and would avoid putting their father/brother/uncle (ect) in the awkward position of having to deny consent. Not to say that a Prince/ss shouldn't marry their choice just that they know better than to ask to for consent where certain extreme issues exist. But, the consent requirement does in my mind make at least appear to make people make more responsible choices for their family and their nation. However, even when consent has not been sought/or given the family has welcomed the new additions with open arms and this is not always the case for other families.

Henri did a good thing by requesting that females not only be admitted to the line of succession but that the succession be gender blind henceforth. We give the government too much credit on this matter. The idea for the change to succession law originates within the Grand Ducal Family. I really have a lot of respect for him on this matter.

Oh, I just noticed the change to a new thread. Thanks ladies. I hadn't thought to start a new discussion.

grace marie 04-28-2009 12:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LadyLeana (Post 925450)
I didn't think prince Louis and his children were in line for succession, because of the kids and the marriage.

Well, getting permission for a wedding these days is more or less a formality (probably), but because of the child born out of wedlock, I don't think Louis and his children will be restored to the succession line. It wouldn't be very fair towards the eldest, would it?

Of course, it wouldn't be fair. But I wonder... is it big deal for him? Louis is 3. son of Grand Duke Henri so he doesn't wait for the throne. Guillaume will be perfect Grand Duke and I don't imagine situation when he will abdicate or sth like that. But even if sth wrong happened it's still Felix here.

Anyway, most of the young royals would lead rather normal life and they don't dream about been Queen/King/ Grand Duke so I wouldn't be suprised if Louis was lucky becouse of that. He and Tessy are good relationship with Henri and Maria Teresa I suppose.

I try to imagine what would happen if prince Harry or William were in such situation. I imagine headlines in tabloid: Queen in shock, Will lost the throne, Dirty Harry will be King!"

Luxembourg is really nice country.

Principessa Cano 09-11-2009 10:53 PM

I'm quite impressed with the modern approach the Lux. GDF take. I was impressed how they handled the Louis/Tessy situation (can you imagine how that would have gone down if it had been Prince Harry?), but there seems to have been no scandal. I am also impressed that this change to the constitution allows for female heirs to take their place in the line of succession in accordance to their birth order, and not be supplanted by younger brothers.

rociocristina 09-12-2009 11:59 PM

thanks to all for the explanations on the topic of Louis, I think he did the right thing, I think that's as a rule in the royalty, well in the Spanish forum where I participate, say it's the best they could do because louis understands that it is "be of the royalty" I think it was very good, and renounce the throne, but continues to participate in all family events, sometimes, I think more than felix, other royal families, who give up throne not heavily involved in the events and are not very close to the family, the opposite of luxembourg

Lakshmi 09-13-2009 02:45 AM

IMO All those changs in Luxembourg constitution are not necessary. GD Henri opposed euthanasia and they change constitution just because of that. He had a right to oppose legislature so he just used this right. Now it seems that this right was only on paper, and changing constitution will not change really anything.
Including females in succession line is a good idea, because it is practical in case the dynasty runs off males. But removing male-preference in succession and making it related to the birth order goes too far. It is fair, of course. But monarchy is not about equality it is about tradition, and I don't like modernizing monarchy no matter what. If we go farther monarchy might be eliminated all together.
RE: Louis children, he renounced his right to the throne voluntarily (or maybe with his parent advice) so his children are not included in succession.

Magrat 09-13-2009 01:18 PM

But if monarchies would only follow tradition, they would become out of touch with the reality of their people, and they would not be accepted either. I think that the way the Luxembourg monarchy is modernized is exemplary. I don't see why you think modernization makes monarchy obsolete.

I think it is only natural that woman get an equal chance, since very often, female rulers were among the best, look at Elizabeth I, or Grand Duchess Charlotte! Even Marie-Adelaide had promise to be a great Grand Duchess, but she was also punished for being too politically involved.

MamboQueen 09-13-2009 01:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lakshmi (Post 991029)
IMO All those changs in Luxembourg constitution are not necessary. GD Henri opposed euthanasia and they change constitution just because of that. He had a right to oppose legislature so he just used this right. Now it seems that this right was only on paper, and changing constitution will not change really anything.
Including females in succession line is a good idea, because it is practical in case the dynasty runs off males. But removing male-preference in succession and making it related to the birth order goes too far. It is fair, of course. But monarchy is not about equality it is about tradition, and I don't like modernizing monarchy no matter what. If we go farther monarchy might be eliminated all together.
RE: Louis children, he renounced his right to the throne voluntarily (or maybe with his parent advice) so his children are not included in succession.

:nonono:

I humbly beg to differ.
There's nothing wrong with a change in the line of succession, it's about time. It isn't fair that the ability and right to rule is determined by what genitals a royal was born with, it's not a tradition I'd particularly be proud of.
Tradition is important but in the 21st century a different message needs to be sent so that monarchies remain and people can continue look up to their royals instead of outgrowing them in ideals.
In modern, developed societies women are seen more equal to men than ever and it could be that if monarchies don't make certain changes within a couple of generations, they'll become obsolete and may even be seen as backwards, and no one wants that.


:D


Lakshmi 09-13-2009 06:08 PM

Of course I am supporting equality. Examples of of great woman monarchs are thousands years old, the oldest ones are from ancient Egypt. But I still believe that some tradition should stay, and yes if monarchies continue to be modernized so royals would be like commoners, what is a point of keeping monarchy. Yes I believe they will become obsolete.
But it is nice that some have different opinion than mine. This is why we come to this forum, to share and read others, sometimes different points of view. Happy posting.:flowers:

Esmerelda 11-28-2010 03:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lalla Meriem (Post 925452)
Henri did a good thing by requesting that females not only be admitted to the line of succession but that the succession be gender blind henceforth. We give the government too much credit on this matter. The idea for the change to succession law originates within the Grand Ducal Family. I really have a lot of respect for him on this matter.

Really? Was it his idea?

Any word on the change in the constitution?

Fürstin Taxis 11-28-2010 03:31 PM

But then I ask myself why they call themselves Nassau arisen from Bourbon Parmas? Isn´t it more logical that they are just Bourbon Parmas?
So GD Charlotte was the last Nassau. Don´t kill me now, it´s just a thought.

Lalla Meriem 11-28-2010 07:14 PM

They decided to retain the dynastic name Nassau even after Charlotte married Felix. Her children inherited their places in the succession and their Luxembourg titles from her. Why not keep the dynastic name of the woman that they owe their position too? It seems logical. It just doesn't fit with the tradition of taking the name of the man.

It was Jean that decided to take keep Nassau as the dynastic name. He renounced the Bourbon name in 1986. He later overturned this decree but decided to retain Nassau as the family name. Jean wanted to have sole control over his dynasty. It was rumored that he wasn't happy with the old Duke of Parma interfering in his house (marriage approval) as if it were a mere cadet branch of Parma instead of a reigning dynasty.

Fürstin Taxis 12-04-2010 01:45 PM

Thanks Lalla :flowers:

Roadkilltiger 04-28-2011 10:34 AM

Luxembourg Royals & Religion
 
I was curious, can the Luxembour royals marry someone who's not Catholic? Do they lose their place in the line of succession?


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:11 PM.

Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2014
Jelsoft Enterprises