Originally Posted by Ish
RoyalJewish, I ask this respectfully, but are you newer to following the Romanian royals? Because there is grounds for supporting every single one of the claimaints that Duc has listed, including Paul-Philippe.
- Paul-Philippe and his father Carol have fought and won a number of legal cases recognizing Carol as a legitimate son of Carol II and granting Carol (and thus Paul) full succession rights. Thus, in the era where the Romanian Royal Family is not reigning, there as much of a chance of a restoration under Paul as their is under Margarita - especially as Paul has an established heir (his son, Carol), while Margarita really doesn’t.
- According to the last Constitution of Romania in which the Succession was addressed, none of the children or grandchildren of Michael I have succession rights, and actually Karl Friedrich, Prince of Hohenzollern is the heir. This claim (even if the Hohenzollerns do not exercise it) is at this time the closest to being Romanian Law, as it’s supported by actual Romanian Law, however defunct that Law is.
- According to Michael’s rules, the successor is his daughter, Margarita, and according to the precedent he set the succession can be changed willy-nilly with absolutely no explanation provided to the public (as seen with Nicholas, Irina, and Irina’s children and grandchildren). Further, this line has no stability for the future, as Margarita has no children, and the asides from Nicholas, no member of the next generation has shown any interest in Romania whatsoever - so why on Earth would the Romanians want a restoration under this line, if this line is clear that it doesn’t care about Romania? (Granted, the same could be said about the Hohenzollerns)
- Romanian monarchists - who were forced to accept Margarita during Michael’s life, but are not forced to do so now - may also want to turn to Nicholas himself, as it was Nicholas that they wanted Michael to name as his heir in the first place. Regardless of the circumstances of his removal from Michael’s succession, Nicholas still remains a popular person in Romania and still expresses an interest for Romania
That puts 4 different possible claimaints to the throne now that Michael has passed.
When addressing the issue of succession (of which there is a more appropriate thread than this one), one can go over abolished legal stature of 1923 as much as one likes, but the only thing that is really relevant today, is what is more likely and what is not.
The Hohenzollern branch is not an alternative, all the reasons have been listed before and they have excluded themselves from Romania and succession to an intended restored throne, in both practical terms and in minds of Romanians, who have no connections to them any longer.
The only thing that is truly relevant at this point, is how is this issue seen by Romanians at large, politicians and those with influence and power in the Romanian society. For all intents and purposes, they are making it clear that the representatives of the Romanian monarchy, is the Custodian of the Crown and her family. Nicholas continues to belong to that family, whether or not he is formally titled or not, and as his aunt is childless, there really is no way to bypass him when it comes to the 2nd generation after the King, as a continuation of the Royal Family.
For now, it remains to be seen whether Nicholas relocates permanently to Romania, and if that moves the debate forward. My guess is it will.
Everything else is a digression the cause of monarchy can do without.