Infanta Cristina's Ducal Title Revoked; June 2015

[Winnie]

Originally Posted by Dman

I would hope none of this stuff is affecting the relationships between her and her family.

Oh I don't believe that you will get your wish. It has already affected the family. Even aunts and uncles take sides. No one in any position likes to see someone in their family break any law or have the appearance of breaking the law. Personally I think that it is a very sad thing for the Spanish Royals and the Spanish citizens. I am sure that Cristina and husband thought they would skate with just a slap on the wrist because of who they are. Apparently Spain's legal system, while fairly slow, is not afraid of higher-ups and will try to follow the exact law, if proven. Like I said before, the judge MUST know something concrete against Cristina or this would never be happening. He is not a silly man.

[Winnie]

Originally Posted by GracieGiraffe

'

Has anybody blamed Letizia yet?

I just thought the same thing. Of course they will, JC will see to that.

[sjetajiem]

It is easier to judge Inaki U. and Cristina B. So I really expect that sooner (or later) Cristina will give up her succession rights and title by herself or will be forced to by a royal decree

[Winnie]

Originally Posted by Marengo

Yes I remember those too (Palma residents complaining). And in their place I would be complaining too probably.

Still, they could have waited until after the trial. Nobody is legally proven guilty yet. That is what should count in a state of law, which Spain is. Presumption of Innocence is something that is written in both EU as Spanish law.

You are absolutely correct that no one is guilty until proven. But remember the judge took over a year reading papers and could have stated that there was no evidence that Cristina was knowingly involved and could have released her only bring to trial her husband. He didn't, much to the shock of SRF. He MUST have seen something which caused this. If she is found not guilty, so be it, the judge's hands will be clean. Otherwise it really could have looked to many people that Judge was "talked" to by royals to look the other way.

I feel sorry for King Felipe, his own sister, but glad he has the backbone to do it.

[Winnie]

Originally Posted by lucien

Very good step!!Next step,strip her of her place in line to the Throne and subsequently her Royal title,she's not worth it!

I admire Felipe's courage and straightforwardness in handling this matter altogether

I do agree with you. I admire Felipe but also feel sorry for him. What an awful position for him and especially his lovely mother.

[princess gertrude]

I was anticipating this for a while. Of course, I thought he would also have stripped her of the Infanta as well, but after realizing that takes a law through parliment, I understand why he did not do that. Good move on his part, stripping her before the government steps in and possibly demands it. And as far as the information that says that she sent a letter asking to be releaved of her title, I'm not sure I believe that for one minute. Just like I don't believe that she will ask to be removed from succession. I think that will come if she is convicted.

[Rebafan81]

Originally Posted by Marengo

For what would she be blamed? I hope she isn't still victimized as she actually seems like a strong lady to me.

***
I see the 'innocent until proven guilty' is not a sentiment shared by many, including the court and the king. Nobody has been convicted yet so it seems a bit premature. Though this action shows that the royal court has not a lot of faith in what will happen next. Perhaps rightly so.

I suppose it makes the court look pro-active. That it was the king withdrawing the title distances him even further from the mess, which is a sensible harm-reduction policy. If Cristina would have given up the title herself the sentiment would most likely be 'why didn't she give up her HRH too?' While now she seems to be punished and humiliated which may apease some of the Spanish public for now.

I can't help but feel sorry for the family. They must have suffered a lot these last years and the list of humiliations is not over yet. Of course it is self-inlicted, but still... I am sure that many in Spain and elsewhere will be gloating over this but I don't think it wise to beat somebody who is already down.

Marengo, I agree with you, I also feel sooo sorry for the children, its bad enough that they are exposed to all of this but to basically have your family treat your family like they are guilty without conviction, has got to be unbearable, aren't the courts suppose to decided who is guilty, but lately its public opinion, reporters, and everyone else who decides your fate, you are no longer innocent until proven guilty.

[An Ard Ri]

Its made its way into the Irish Times (The Irish media don't normally cover royalty unless its to do with the British RF or Prince family of Monaco.

Spain’s King Felipe VI strips title of duchess from his sister

[grevinnan]

Originally Posted by Rebafan81

Marengo, I agree with you, I also feel sooo sorry for the children, its bad enough that they are exposed to all of this but to basically have your family treat your family like they are guilty without conviction, has got to be unbearable, aren't the courts suppose to decided who is guilty, but lately its public opinion, reporters, and everyone else who decides your fate, you are no longer innocent until proven guilty.

This decision may have more to do with her husband then her. She is still an Infanta but her husband is now left without a title. I am sure this decision has been contemplated since prior to the abdication of Juan Carlos. By delaying the action he did not have to do this to his daughter.

The issue with succession rights will likely be addressed once a final verdict is reached which could be years from now if Spain has an appeals process.

[GracieGiraffe]

From what I am reading from our Spanish posters (please correct me if I'm wrong), it almost has nothing to do with whether she's guilty or not. If the people of a region no longer want someone holding a title for some reason - for whatever reason - and the failure to do anything could cause political chaos in a place which does not need any more chaos, then what is a monarch to do?

Suppose the people of a Swedish region no longer want X as their duke or duchess - the reason being they are all republicans in that area or some other issue with the person itself.

What if some Scots regions, still smarting over the loss of the independence vote, demand that X is no longer Lord Y?

What is a monarch to do here?

As for her remaining titles and rights of succession, I am assuming nothing will be done until there is a conviction (if any). At that point, even if she is the only one who can renounce either, I believe we will see constitutional changes or legislation, whatever it takes, to revoke those.

[The House of Cooke]

Could it be possible that it's just a temporary thing? I don't really know how these royal titles go, but could he give her back the title if she's found not guilty? Idk, seems like someone was in his ear about the whole situation.

[Mbruno]

Originally Posted by lula

The Royal House has done everything they could do.

She can renounce her dynastic rights, but that is a personal decision.

The other option is that the Parliament would remove the rights, but that would require a law was passed, and probably only be done if she is judged and condemned and she does not resign voluntarily.

She cannot renounce her rights unilaterally. As in the case of an abdication, a renunciation requires an organic law to become legally valid.

"
Article 57 [Succession]
(1) The Crown of Spain is hereditary for the successors of H.M. Don Juan Carlos I of Borbon, legitimate heir of the historic dynasty. Succession to the throne will follow the regular order of primogeniture and representation, the first line always having preference over subsequent lines; within the same line, the closer grade over the more remote; in the same grade, the male over the female; and in the same sex, the elder over the younger.
(2) The hereditary Prince, from his birth or from the time he acquires the claim, will have the title of Prince of Asturias and the other titles traditionally linked to the successor to the Crown of Spain.
(3) If all the lines entitled by law become extinct, the Parliament shall provide for the succession to the crown in the manner which is best for the interests of Spain.
(4) Those persons, who having the right to succession to the throne, contract matrimony against the express prohibition by the King and the Parliament, shall be excluded, along with their descendants, from succession to the Crown.
(5) Abdications and renunciations and any doubt in fact or inlaw which may occur in the order of succession to the Crown, shall be resolved by an organic law."

Please note again that the constitution of Spain says:

"
Article 64 [Countersignature]
(1) The actions of the King shall be countersigned by the President of the Government and, when appropriate, by the competent ministers. The nomination and appointment of the President of the Government and the dissolution provided for in Article 93 shall be countersigned by the President of the House of Representatives.
(2) The persons who countersign the acts of the King shall be responsible for them."


Therefore, Mariano Rajoy, who countersigned the royal decree, is legally responsible for stripping Cristina of her ducal title, even if that was a personal decision of the King (which we don't really know for sure).

[Duke of Marmalade]

Originally Posted by lula

From the Royal House, they have always asked the Infanta a gesture, a waiver ... something that shows she regrets, she has done the wrong thing and has damaged the Crown. But she always refused.

it is sad that it had to come to this

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...aud-trial.html
Spanish king strips his sister Cristina de Borbon of title - Telegraph

[Duc_et_Pair]

Originally Posted by Fürstin Taxis

lol
I don't feel sorry at all for her. What goes around comes around

Okay. Give me your drive license. Now. You have not been found guilty, you have not been convicted. But give me your drive license. Now.

Exactly the same principle. What will happen when the Court of Justice decides that there is no sufficient ground for the claims laid down on the Infanta? Will she be restored then? It is all so premature and shows Don Felipe as a man of little principle.

So to see the basic principle Ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat (the burden of proof is on he who declares, not on he who denies), is not in good hands with the King. He has already declared his sister guilty.

[tommy100]

I think its interesting that by these actions Cristina still is titled, Infanta and HRH but Inaki is now simply Mr Urdangarin (even if he never held the title in his own right he is no longer part of the Duke & Duchess of Palma de Mallorca).

It could be said Felipe has taken a title from Cristina that, though significant to the media and yes can be seen a something of a 'punishment' is not really a massive thing, she still holds Royal titles. However it, in a way, affects Inaki more making him simply a commoner married to a member of the Spanish Royal Family.

[Duke of Marmalade]

I think, as lula indicated, there was some urge to do it know as another polemic s***storm was about to go down on the SRF. Of course Felipe is bowing to public opinion, his main goal is to become more popular.

If not for that reason, why now? Felipe could have done this in the beginning or after the formal charges or even JC before his abdication.

Cristina will awalys be a King's daughter, her place in succession is irrelevant though.

[Lee-Z]

Originally Posted by Duc_et_Pair

Okay. Give me your drive license. Now. You have not been found guilty, you have not been convicted. But give me your drive license. Now.

If you want to use this analogy:
your spouse has been suspected of causing accidents with their car for several years, you yourself have been suspected of causing accidents with said car for over a year. You are scheduled to appear in court for these allegations.
Added to that you have a rolemodel postion in your environment.
You are not convicted for these car-accidents, but then again you have up until now never shown any compassion for the people who were hurt in the accidents, but you appear most concerned with getting your car back

that's more similar to what's happening to just "give me your driving licence"

as always imo

[ANNIE_S]

We have a saying in Spain: "la mujer del César no sólo debe ser honrada, sino parecerlo" - "Caesar's wife must not only being honest, but looking like it"

Whether she's guilty or not, the damage is done. It just add to the seriousness of her fault. She will never be able to have a normal life as a royal in Spain. She should have known better. They both have been incredibly selfish and clumsy.

[Isabella]

Originally Posted by Marengo

I would say that that is one of the basic principles of any state of law. At least in Europe. So yes, IMHO the correct procedure would be to wait until a conviction. They could 'suspend' the title in the mean time, awaiting the verdict. If we would all punish people before a trial what a mess it would become. Why have a trial at all?

Of course in this case there may be very good reasons for an alternative approach, but I have not seen them published by the court. The reason that Annie_S has provided us with may be the most logical reaosn why the court has taken these steps now.

There is no doubt in my mind that Inaki is guilty, and that Cristina must have known something. However, my thoughts or those of others -fortunately- are not legally binding. Perpatuation of innocence is a great good that in many countries took centuries to achieve. I do not think it is something that should be treated lightly. However I also am sure that neither the king nor the government treat it as such (so I agree with you on that Winnie and casualfan), so like MARG I am stuck in a limbo on this.

Of course ideally the Infanta would have handed over the title herself. However, that could be considered as pleading guilty, something she hasn't done (yet).

The principle of being innocent until proven guilty is, of course, very important within the justice system. However, that pertains to any punishment that would be handled by a court of law, it doesn't mean that your actions won't have wide-reaching consequences in other areas of your life. Often when people, especially those in the public eye, are charged with a crime, there are ramifications in other parts of their lives: for example, frequently they are put in a position where they have to "resign" from their jobs, or sever ties with certain organizations (this happens a lot when politicians or other public officials are accused of something illegal).

The court of law is responsible for how a crime (or potential crime) is dealt with in the justice system, it doesn't regulate the ramifications in all areas of your life. Some are acting as if Felipe has sentenced his sister to prison, but he's acting within his authority and the courts are acting within theirs.

[Duc_et_Pair]

Originally Posted by ANNIE_S

We have a saying in Spain: "la mujer del César no sólo debe ser honrada, sino parecerlo" - "Caesar's wife must not only being honest, but looking like it"

The prosecutor (and the King) say: "For Law, we are all equal".

No. Clearly not. Your saying above shows that Infanta Doña Cristina is not judged equal. The ladies and gentlemen politicians have to shut up. Their smell of corruptism, nepotism, favoritism and clientelism is so unbearable, they are the LAST ones to blame Infanta Doña Cristina anything. That counts exactly also for her "August" father who is not spotless either. Don Felipe should have been a man and stand behind his sister until Justice has been done. Then the King can say: the Judges have spoken, this are the consequences. But this.... bah bah.