Delphine Boël, daughter of King Albert II

[Osipi]

No matter if they decide that to acknowledge Delphine as Albert's daughter by skywriting it every day for a week and give her all the titles and status and the perks that go along with them, Delphine is still going to find herself in the same place emotionally as she was before she started all these legal actions.

One can't force a relationship or demand to be treated as "family". I really don't see what all these "legal" decisions are going to accomplish other than its a fact that she is legally Albert's child by a mistress outside of his marriage. That will never change.

[Denville]

Originally Posted by Osipi

No matter if they decide that to acknowledge Delphine as Albert's daughter by skywriting it every day for a week and give her all the titles and status and the perks that go along with them, Delphine is still going to find herself in the same place emotionally as she was before she started all these legal actions.

One can't force a relationship or demand to be treated as "family". I really don't see what all these "legal" decisions are going to accomplish other than its a fact that she is legally Albert's child by a mistress outside of his marriage. That will never change.

and that is not her fault. She didn't ask to be born. ALbert let her down when he denied her and he did so in a horrible heartless way. IF Delphine wants to get some compensation for that, I think she's entitled.

[Tatiana Maria]

Originally Posted by Mbruno

The non-royal title of Prince (with the style of Highness or Serene Highness) is not granted, however, by the King of the Belgians to commoners who are elevated to the nobility. It is only recognized for Belgian families who already held a princely title, usually in the Holy Roman Empire or the Austrian Netherlands, before the independence of Belgium in 1830/1831. The usual titles of nobility that are still awarded today in Belgium are those of count, viscount and baron.



There is little doubt that Delphine will get recognition as Albert's legal daughter (including the right to use his family name) and a share of his inheritance. Not only is that the normal position now in Belgian law, but also King Albert himself has said through his lawyers that he will no longer dispute the paternity claim in court and will make provisions for Delphine in his will. Anything beyond that is an unreasonable request on Delphine's part, including the demand that she be treated equally as her half-siblings which means:


1. A place in the line of succession to the throne (Delphine would be currently 17th).
2. A title of Princess of Belgium with the style of Royal Highness.
3. A position in the official order of precedence in public and private events in Belgium.
4. An official public role subject to ministerial responsibility.
5. State (i.e taxpayer) funding and access to other privileges such as the right of disposal over assets in the (800-million Euro) Royal Donation Trust including a royal residence belonging to the Trust.


There is no reason why King Philippe should agree to any of the above, nor is he under any obligation to want Delphine as "part of the family" even on an informal basis.

Originally Posted by Denville

ALbert let her down when he denied her and he did so in a horrible heartless way. IF Delphine wants to get some compensation for that, I think she's entitled.

With his behavior and policies since his ascension to the throne, King Philippe has indicated that he feels state funding, an official public role taking on royal engagements, a publicly-funded royal residence, and the use of HRH and "of Belgium" are privileges, not entitlements, and that he believes as King he can (with the collaboration of the Government) ration them as he sees fit - which is to focus them on his own wife and descendants.

There has been reporting from credible royal journalists that this attitude has been a major source of friction between him and his (legal) siblings. Regardless of the rebuffs, King Philippe has not walked back his decisions.

While he may support compensating Delphine Boël from King Albert's private funds, my view is that it strains belief to think Philippe will support her wish to receive an official public role, state funding and housing, and royal titles for herself and her children.

Nevertheless, should the courts order that Delphine receive state funding, state housing, and/or royal titles, I believe Philippe will comply with the terms of the final ruling.

However, if the courts order that Delphine be given an official public role, I predict that Philippe will limit that role as narrowly as the ruling permits.

[tommy100]

Albert should make provision of Delphine, of course he should, she in entitled to that. But why should the King of the Belgians, the State and the taxpayers of Belgium make provision for her?

I 100% understood her fight to get Albert to admit she was his daughter and to get part of his eventual estate. Asking the State to provide income, an official title, a formal role is just, well quite frankly, ridiculous. As others have said even Albert and Paola's children aren't treated equally in that Philippe is King, with a larger allowance, better residence etc, Astrid undertakes official visits overseas and Laurent doesn't.

[Somebody]

Originally Posted by Tatiana Maria

The exact words of her lawyer Marc Uyttendaele, translated into English, were: "She doesn't want to be a cut-price child, she wants to have exactly the same privileges, titles and capacities as her brothers and her sister".

Post #1816 enumerates some of the "privileges, titles, and capacities" which are shared by all three siblings.

Interestingly, the three legal siblings do not have exactly the same privileges, titles and capacities. As crown prince and later king, Philippe has benefited from more expansive privileges, titles, and capacities than his sister and his brother, not least the office of head of state. Under the system of primogeniture, they are, as Mr. Uyttendaele puts it, "cut-price" in comparison to their oldest brother.

It seems she doesn't want to understand that her position is not exactly the same as her brothers and sisters - because part of their privileges is due to their parents' marriage being recognized as dynastically valid - something that cannot be said of her parents adulterous relationship.

[Somebody]

Originally Posted by Duc_et_Pair

The baroness thought that she was unable to conceive. That is why she and Albert, both unhappy in their own marriages, took no precautions. From the first second it was crystal clear that a father role was impossible for the Prince de Liège, the successor to his childless brother King Baudouin. Not only were mother and father both from a milieu with conservative norms. It was also the Catholic Belgium of 50 years ago and there was the monarchy under the pious, ascetic and strict King and Queen.

I guess in the 60s the general thought was that when a couple didn't have children it must be the 'wife's fault'... A far-reaching misunderstanding of the facts in this case.

[Somebody]

I just found out there has been a family relationship (by law) between the king and queen and the Boël family for several years.

Jkhr. Jacques Boël's aunt Jkvr. Maya Boël is the grandmother of Mathilde's brother-in-law.

Maya Boël was the youngest sibling and only sister of Max Boël (second son/child), the father of Jacques Boël and until recently grandfather of Delphine. Maya Boël married Charles-Emmanuel baron Janssen. Their son Daniel baron Janssen is the father of Nicholas baron Janssen, husband of countess Helene d'Udekem d'Acoz, sister of queen Mathilde.

Details:
Ir. Pol-Clovis baron Boël (1868-1941)
2. Jhr. ir. Max Boël (1901-1975)
2.1. Jhr. ir. Jacques Boël (1929)
2.1.1. Jkvr. Delphine Boël (1968)
4. Jkvr. Maya Boël (1909-1996)
4.? Daniel baron Janssen (1936)
4.?.1. Nicolas baron Janssen (1974)

I wonder whether and if so how that might play into any decisions made by the king and queen in dealing with Delphine.

[victor1319]

Originally Posted by Somebody

It seems she doesn't want to understand that her position is not exactly the same as her brothers and sisters - because part of their privileges is due to their parents' marriage being recognized as dynastically valid - something that cannot be said of her parents adulterous relationship.

This is a good point! I mean, we are talking about the a bit dusty and oldish world of royalty here.

BUT: Delphine is the only scientific proven kid of the former King - the others might be born in a marriage, but the old Romans knew it: Only the mother is sure! And in our crazy times even the mother not anymore - it might be a surrogate birth...

[Somebody]

Originally Posted by victor1319

This is a good point! I mean, we are talking about the a bit dusty and oldish world of royalty here.

BUT: Delphine is the only scientific proven kid of the former King - the others might be born in a marriage, but the old Romans knew it: Only the mother is sure! And in our crazy times even the mother not anymore - it might be a surrogate birth...

Which I think is constitutionally irrelevant. Delphine was recognized as the daughter of Jacques Boël and enjoyed all the rights as such; the three children of the king and queen are legally their children and as such are in the line of succession (or the current king).

[victor1319]

Originally Posted by Somebody

Which I think is constitutionally irrelevant.

Yes, of course it is! Especially since until recently there was no DNA testing, so a kid out of a marriage was almost always legit. And the good News: in 98 (!!!) percent of marriages the kids are the biological offspring of their married parents, Belgian (sic) scientists found out.
https://www.cell.com/pb-assets/journ...n/tree2086.pdf

(It is just, that here in The Royal Forums we have threads about royal kids going back to even the Queen of Sheeba. And then 2 percent per Generation not from the father? So, what are the odds, one can follow the "blood"-line back, even if the Queen of Sheeba ever existed?)

[Eskimo]

Originally Posted by Tatiana Maria

With his behavior and policies since his ascension to the throne, King Philippe has indicated that he feels state funding, an official public role taking on royal engagements, a publicly-funded royal residence, and the use of HRH and "of Belgium" are privileges, not entitlements, and that he believes as King he can (with the collaboration of the Government) ration them as he sees fit - which is to focus them on his own wife and descendants.

There has been reporting from credible royal journalists that this attitude has been a major source of friction between him and his (legal) siblings. Regardless of the rebuffs, King Philippe has not walked back his decisions.

While he may support compensating Delphine Boël from King Albert's private funds, my view is that it strains belief to think Philippe will support her wish to receive an official public role, state funding and housing, and royal titles for herself and her children.

Nevertheless, should the courts order that Delphine receive state funding, state housing, and/or royal titles, I believe Philippe will comply with the terms of the final ruling.

However, if the courts order that Delphine be given an official public role, I predict that Philippe will limit that role as narrowly as the ruling permits.

I can’t think the court would have any jurisdiction to order an official role for Delphine even if they wanted to.

[Addapalla]

So no decision yet about Delphine's future surname and/or title ?

[Moonmaiden23]

The very idea strikes me as so absurd.....

[Tatiana Maria]

Originally Posted by Addapalla

So no decision yet about Delphine's future surname and/or title ?

No, and nor has there been a decision on whether she will be legally acknowledged as King Albert's child (that outcome is virtually assured) or whether her request for privileges including a state dotation and housing will be granted. The court is expected to hand down a decision on October 29, though according to royal reporter Wim Dehandschutter it is possible that the date could be brought forward.

[Prinsara]

Does the court have jurisdiction to rule over anything except the original expectation of legal paternity and subsequent name change?

[Tatiana Maria]

Originally Posted by Prinsara

Does the court have jurisdiction to rule over anything except the original expectation of legal paternity and subsequent name change?

King Albert's lawyers are contending it does not (as a matter of fact, they contend that even the name change requires an administrative procedure), while Delphine Boël's lawyers clearly consider that it does.

Prince Laurent once stated that he intended to mount a legal challenge to the cut imposed by the King and Government on his dotation in 2017, so the argument that a state-funded salary is a legal entitlement is not new. Has anything come of his planned lawsuit? I was unable to find anything more.

[Prinsara]

“Delphine's position isn't that she wants or doesn't want to be princess,” her lawyer Marc Uyttendaele said.

Interesting. (The rest of his quote is well-known, but she wants "the same" as her half-sibs) So it's not really about being a princess, then. Just some sort of equal treatment. On the other hand, "Princess" is the only title she could pass to her children.

I'm also fairly sure Albert's lawyers have argued a court-awarded decision would constitute a major precedent with all the rest of the illegitimate children of Belgium.

If Delphine wants the title (and does she truly want the princess duties? honestly?) she is going to have to ask big brother very nicely.

[Tatiana Maria]

Originally Posted by Prinsara

“Delphine's position isn't that she wants or doesn't want to be princess,” her lawyer Marc Uyttendaele said.

Interesting. (The rest of his quote is well-known, but she wants "the same" as her half-sibs) So it's not really about being a princess, then. Just some sort of equal treatment. On the other hand, "Princess" is the only title she could pass to her children.

All of the press articles I have seen did cite the entire quote. From the same link:

Lawyers for the 52-year-old artist and aristocrat have now lodged a demand at a Brussels court that Ms Boël be allowed to take the title of princess, be referred to as “her Royal Highness” and bear the name of Saxe-Coburg. [...]

“Delphine's position isn't that she wants or doesn't want to be princess,”her lawyer Marc Uyttendaele said.

"She does not want to be a child on the cheap, she wants to have exactly the same prerogatives, titles and qualities as her brothers and sisters.”

Mr. Uyttendaele is unequivocal that his client asks to be granted the same titles, and the same prerogatives, as her future half-siblings. The first part of the quote which you cited is simply his declaration that the requests are motivated by equality and not greed.

Originally Posted by Prinsara

I'm also fairly sure Albert's lawyers have argued a court-awarded decision would constitute a major precedent with all the rest of the illegitimate children of Belgium.

The only argument which they have publicly utilized up to now is the one mentioned in the article:

Once again Ms Boël was opposed by her father’s lawyers, who argued that it was for the monarch, and not the court, to decide on such titles by decree. The court will hand down its judgement on October 29.

[...]

“As far as the title is concerned, it is not a prerogative of the court but a prerogative of the executive power, in our opinion,” said Alain Berenboom, the former king's legal counsel.

Originally Posted by Prinsara

If Delphine wants the title (and does she truly want the princess duties? honestly?) she is going to have to ask big brother very nicely.

She may not need to if the courts override the laws currently in force to rule in her favor, as they have done before in this process.

[Prinsara]

I'm wondering why on Earth the 2005 law wasn't written limiting titles to "the legitimate descendants" of Albert. How short-sighted or invulnerable or wanting to deny the existence of illegitimate kids was Albert feeling? Did he truly believe Delphine would never get this far?

[Tatiana Maria]

Originally Posted by Prinsara

I'm wondering why on Earth the 2005 law wasn't written limiting titles to "the legitimate descendants" of Albert. How short-sighted or invulnerable or wanting to deny the existence of illegitimate kids was Albert feeling?

I assume you mean 2015? I recommend reading the explanations in the Titles and Styles thread, but to answer briefly: The likely reason is that the original intent of the series of royal decrees in 1891, 1991, and 2015 was never to rule on which descendants would or would not be titled as princesses and princes. Their original intent was only to rule on which princesses and princes would be referred to by the name "of Belgium".

Originally Posted by Prinsara

Did he truly believe Delphine would never get this far?

This is speculation only, but I suspect the 2015 decree may have been written by Philippe (Albert abdicated in 2013) with Delphine in mind. The series of posts I am writing in that thread will explain this more thoroughly.