The Royal Forums

The Royal Forums (
-   Royalty Past, Present, and Future (
-   -   Can Your King/Queen Be Judged? (

espejor 07-23-2009 08:42 AM

Can Your King/Queen Be Judged?
Hello! In Spain the Constitution says that the King can't be judged by his acts. But I don't know if it is referring to political acts or all the acts (for example, if the King murders somebody).

An in your country?


BELTRANEJA 07-23-2009 04:35 PM

In Spain his inviolability is absolute, it affects his public and private events ... but the Constitution does not speak of the inviolability of consort (Queen) and Prince.
Inviolability is general in all European constitutions, including the republics, where it also enjoys inviolability the President of the Republic and the Prime Minister.
All kings and presidents of the Republic are inviolable .. They can be investigated but not prosecuted ...

susan alicia 07-23-2009 04:43 PM

In Holland the ministers are responsable for the Royal Family, the Queen is immunune, can do no wrong and the ministers are respobsible for what she says as head of state.

That is it in a nutshell but it can be elobarorated on with examples in the past :flowers:

Royal Fan 07-23-2009 09:03 PM

What about the UK?

TheTruth 07-24-2009 10:57 AM

This may enlighten a few things about the Queen and the British law : Law Spot - The Queen's Law

It's about the Burrell case but it can be applied for any trial:


As well, the Queen is immune from prosecution, and is unlikely to be invited to give evidence in any court proceedings. In part she cannot be allowed to entangle herself in cases that in fact bear her own name.
To complete that, the Queen can, on ministerial advice, pardon or show mercy to those convicted of crimes. In law the Queen as a private person can do no wrong: she is immune from civil or criminal proceedings and cannot be sued in courts of law. This immunity is not shared by other members of the royal family.

Kaatje 07-24-2009 12:04 PM

If members of a royal family (other than the king/queen) travel abroad, do they receive diplomatic immunity from prosecution in other countries even if they do not enjoy the same privilege in their own countries?

susan alicia 07-24-2009 12:16 PM

depends on the crime and the country in which they are in, I imagine:closedeye

I could speculate on which countries where nothing would be a problem if a Royal but that would be controversial.

TheTruth 07-24-2009 01:20 PM

Members of the Royal Family (at least the British one) don't have the immunity the King/Queen has. For example, Princess Anne has a criminal record because she couldn't keep her dog under control.

If anything happens outside UK, then I believe it's up to the justice of the country where the felony has been committed to decide of an arrangement (or not) and allow a judgement in the UK.

MAfan 07-24-2009 01:30 PM

I also remember something about the Princess Royal driving over the speed limit, but she defended herself telling that she was going to attend a royal duty...

BELTRANEJA 07-24-2009 02:24 PM

At international level have immunity , the head of the State (King, President of Republic), the head of Government (President of Government and prime minister) and the minister for Foreign Affairs… because it considere that their activities bind to the State....and the ambassadors and Consules. It is into International Conventions
The rest of people with immunity is established by each state in a list, their activities bind to the State, If they will commit a crimes in other country They can not be arrested, charged .... can only be expelled from this country but this state can breaking relation with the State of the Prince or person with immunity .
Internal immunity, ( the crimes committed within their state), is governed by the Constitution or internal laws ...

The dog of Princess Anna was a recidivist, that dog had killed the dog preferred of the Queen of England.:ermm:

Given that the Princess Anna has no internal immunity, the Queen of England might have denounced her daughter (by the dog) ...But if this had been the reverse, , The Princess Anne not might denounce to her mother:nonono:

Marsel 07-24-2009 03:21 PM

In theory, the Russian Monarch could do 'no wrong' by default (or rather, by Constitution): if something went wrong, his/her Ministers or advisers were to be blamed but never the Monarch.
In practice, that didn't stop Bolsheviks from 'trying' Nicholas II for treason and 'sentencing' him to death.

Same with England/UK: although the British Monarch was and is immune from any prosecution, that didn't stop Charles I from being tried and executed (although he did deny the authority of the Court, and the legality of the 'process' is highly questionable at best).

BELTRANEJA 07-24-2009 04:27 PM

The king of Spain has an absolute inviolability, which means he can not be tried or arrested .. but if he would commits a crime, the consequence of his act would be: the abdication ...

The Queen Sofia and Prince arenīt immunity in Spain, they can be tried ...

the Republicans when they try to criticize the monarchy always refer to the privilege of immunity, they forget that in the Republics,the absolute immunity are President and Prime Minister ...

TheTruth 07-24-2009 05:05 PM


Originally Posted by BELTRANEJA (Post 970365)
the Republicans when they try to criticize the monarchy always refer to the privilege of immunity, they forget that in the Republics,the absolute immunity are President and Prime Minister ...

Yet they still can argue that the President and Prime minister have this immunity just during their term. The King has it his whole lifetime.

maria-olivia 07-24-2009 05:45 PM

My King Albert II NEVER but Queen Paola may be judged as every women in Belgium.

BELTRANEJA 07-24-2009 07:58 PM

It is not exact..The King of Spain has immunity as long as is King, if he voluntarily abdicates in his son because he think that the Prince is ready for it or because the King loses his ability .. he lose his condition of King, the abdication is the end of his condition of King. He isnīt immunity whole his life , he is immunity while he is king. It is as President of Republic while he is President.
the death is not the only cause of lost of the condition of King, it can be lost by:
A-Voluntary Abdication of the King
B-Abdication forced by the parliament
c-Lost of the mental capacity ...

Emperor Roku XIV 11-24-2011 09:46 PM

I don't think the Queen of Canada can be judged, but if she committed murder, they would probably disregard that and try her any way, like ol' King Charles I.

But really, Her Majesty has never done anything wrong, a master of self control she is.

Iluvbertie 11-24-2011 11:06 PM

Her Majesty as The Queen can't be put on trial but Mrs Elizabeth Mountbatten-Windsor can be charged like can any normal citizen.

sirericbreheny 05-26-2014 08:40 PM

Your a little bit wrong on that, Queen Elizabeth 2nd can be Judged, through abdication. If The Lords Of The Council, The British High Courts decide she has done some crime horrible enough to have abdication passed against her then she has to abdicate the throne infavor of her Heir Apparent, which would be Prince Charles. Of course Queen Elizabeth 2nd hasn't done any crimes and has the support of her peoples around the world including Canada, however Queen Elizabeth 2 is not really my queen of queens. If she contacts me and makes up for my ancestors being forced out of England in 1620AD and makes reparations to me and my family then perhaps I might considering supporting her. She can also send me the sword Excalibur since she has that under lock and key, she can start the reparations by sending me monies for the loss of Scrooby Manor as well as Torrie Manor, we use to own both those estates. One is a parkland and the other is a museum.

sirericbreheny 05-26-2014 08:46 PM

The Queen Of Britain and of Canada is one in the same person, if The High Courts Of Britain decided she had committed a crime then she would have to stand trial like any other citizen, however her punishment would be abdication. That stipulation was put into place after a number of Kings and Queens committed crimes and the Lords Of The Council ie The British High Courts became a saftey Valve to stop any crimes the Royals had gotten away with in past times.

The British Parliment would have to make a bill also being included in the Charter Of Rights....though I am not aware of the British name for it but it exists, making the charging of crimes against a King or Queen Legal in Britain which they nearly did a long while ago.

Muhler 05-27-2014 04:07 AM

In Denmark the situation is that the Monarch in theory cannot stand trial.

The DRF has immunity, and it's the Monarch who decides whether members of the DRF should stand trial, or what sentence they should have.

However, the Parliament can convene and declare the Monarch unfit to rule, after which the Regent will take over. Then it will be decided what to do. In all probablillity a special court (a Rigsret) will do that.
I cannot in my wildest dreams imagine the Monarch would go to prison.
QMII would more likely be "abdicated" or declared insane and put on a lifelong "palace-arrest".
In both cases the Crown Prince will take over either as the new King or as Regent.

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:26 PM.

Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2018
Jelsoft Enterprises