Restoration of the Monarchy in Romania - Page 56

Cory · #**1101** 07-01-2016, 06:54 PM

The law clearly speak there is no aim to restore the Monarchy,changes the Royal House in a sort of foundation/ngo controlled by the republican authorities and does not open any door to a future restoration but closes this possibility.

LadyRohan · #**1102** 07-01-2016, 06:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cory

Many of those that signed the Petition against this law are not necessarily in favour of another Dynasty but are in favour of Monarchy. Certainly it is not the right of the republican authorities who is in the Line of Succession.
With the elections coming in autumn it will be very difficult to many politicians to vote such a law.

It is the right of any democratic nation to decide who to offer a throne, and in the case of Romania, the defunct line of succession is neither relevant, nor up to date with the times we live in.
The position given to the Royal Family and the Crown Princess in the new law makes it clear what dynasty is to be the Royal House of Romania, and in as far as a republic can, make it clear who will be offered the throne at a restoration.
Politicians are awake of the upcoming election. They still choose to create this law.
I would say your fear of them not voting for it, is unfounded.

LadyRohan · #**1103** 07-01-2016, 06:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cory

The law clearly speak there is no aim to restore the Monarchy,changes the Royal House in a sort of foundation/ngo controlled by the republican authorities and does not open any door to a future restoration but closes this possibility.

The law does not close the possibility of restoring the monarchy in any way.
Not one part of the law does that, and I would ask you to point to any part of the law proposed that would block a restoration.

Cory · #**1104** 07-01-2016, 06:59 PM

Where it speaks about the form of government.
Instead of advocating to cancel from the Constitution the prohibition to revise the form of government, now Elisabeta Palace would accept a law that clearly speak about not changing the republican form of government.

LadyRohan · #**1105** 07-01-2016, 07:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cory

Where it speaks about the form of government.
Instead of advocating to cancel from the Constitution the prohibition to revise the form of government, now Elisabeta Palace would accept a law that clearly speak about not changing the republican form of government.

This law is not meant to restore the monarchy, it is meant to outlay how the Royal Family is to be assisted by the state, how it is to be organized etc. It does not in any way speak about not restoring the monarchy, but as several monarchical organizations have made clear, it creates a very good platform from which the Royal Family can function, and through their work, spread the message of monarchy in Romania.

The monarchy won't return by zealotry and force, it will return by hard and focused work by the Royal Family, support from politicians and more attention to its strengths.

If some believe in doing it differently, go down that road and see where it leads. I recommend starting with a formal letter to the Hohenzollerns, asking them about restoring the line of succession from 1923.

There's no need to wait for the death of the King, as some have claimed before. He has abdicated his titular claim in favour of his daughter. She is the claimant now.

Ask them.
I for one can't wait for the answer.

Cory · #**1106** 07-01-2016, 07:40 PM

The King,even if represented by his eldest daughter at different events, is still the King.

CSENYC · #**1107** 07-01-2016, 10:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cory

Where it speaks about the form of government.
Instead of advocating to cancel from the Constitution the prohibition to revise the form of government, now Elisabeta Palace would accept a law that clearly speak about not changing the republican form of government.

All the law says is that the law itself isn't intended to be a change in the Constitution.

That should be fine; that's just a lawyer's words and just mean, "this is a regular law; it's not a Constitutional amendment".

The law is silent about future Constitutional changes, which could happen.

It's also fine for Parliament to approve a line of succession; that is normal in European monarchies. If the government decides that a benefit (i.e., official recognition of the Royal House) is being given, it has the right to decide who is part of the Royal House and thus entitled to the benefit.

Again, if this law doesn't pass, King Michael's family will just be regular commoners, like the rest of us, and the people who dispute the validity of the republic will continue to sound crazy. It's important to deal with reality as it is if you want to change it.

Cory · #**1108** 07-02-2016, 03:39 AM

In the constitutional Monarchy it is the Parliament who decides on the Royal House including Succession. Romania is a republic and not a constitutional Monarchy.

CSENYC · #**1109** 07-02-2016, 07:20 AM

Cory, in a democracy where the rule of law exists, a legislature can decide who is entitled to the benefits of laws that it passes. Montenegro, Germany and plenty of other countries are republics where governments have passed laws giving benefits to royal families, and legislatures there have decided who is entitled to those benefits.

Is Romania not a democracy where the rule of law exists?

Again, questioning the legitimacy of the republic is not a pragmatic approach and does more harm than good: it makes the questioner sound crazy.

Cory · #**1110** 07-02-2016, 08:56 AM

One thing is to give a compensation to a former reigning House and completely a different issue to recognize who is the Head of that House. A republic can't decide on that.

**MAfan** · #**1111** 07-02-2016, 09:41 AM

Maybe mine is a silly question, but where exactly is written in the proposed law that it is the republican authorities to decide who is the head of the Royal Family? And exactly in which terms is it written?

LadyRohan · #**1112** 07-02-2016, 10:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MAfan

Maybe mine is a silly question, but where exactly is written in the proposed law that it is the republican authorities to decide who is the head of the Royal Family? And exactly in which terms is it written?

It naturally doesn't say that the Republic has decided who the head of the Royal Family is. It recognizes the choice the King has made, in naming his eldest daughter his heir, so it recognizes the will of the King, and does not on its own, make a decision. It mainly recognizes the Royal House as an actual entity, but it does not deny the Royal House its own sovereign role when it comes to changing the leader of the Royal House at a later stage, or implement other changes.

Casa RegalÄƒ redevine instituÈ›ie fundamentalÄƒ a statului romÃ¢n | Romania Libera

This text explains the background for the law very well, described by lawyers as a very good step to give the Royal Family a much clearer status as a legal entity and not just an idealistic, utopian entity, and describes the fears described by some monarchists as ridiculous fallacies and scaremongering.

The translation of this text in google translate is actually very good and accurate, so anyone who wants more unbiased information about this law proposal and do not read Romanian, can read it here:
https://translate.google.se/translat...659&edit-text=

**MAfan** · #**1113** 07-02-2016, 11:16 AM

That is also how I have understood it, that the succession to the Headship of the Royal Family will be regulated by a statute issued by the King and - to the purposes of the proposed law - the Head of the Royal Family will be the person designated by that statute.
So, no power granted to the Republic to decide who the Head of the Royal Family is and will be.

Cory · #**1114** 07-02-2016, 06:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MAfan

That is also how I have understood it, that the succession to the Headship of the Royal Family will be regulated by a statute issued by the King and - to the purposes of the proposed law - the Head of the Royal Family will be the person designated by that statute.
So, no power granted to the Republic to decide who the Head of the Royal Family is and will be.

The project speaks about the recognition of the "Head of the Royal House" by the two Chambers of the Parliament. Of course this is a not very subtle way by a republican parliament to try to establish a new Line of Succession in contradiction to the constitutional traditions of the Kingdom of Romania.

LadyRohan · #**1115** 07-03-2016, 06:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cory

The project speaks about the recognition of the "Head of the Royal House" by the two Chambers of the Parliament. Of course this is a not very subtle way by a republican parliament to try to establish a new Line of Succession in contradiction to the constitutional traditions of the Kingdom of Romania.

The law, which is not a project, but a law to ensure the Royal House of Romania has certain rights and roles forward, quite naturally recognizes the Head of the Royal House of Romania to be the person designated by the King. It would be a rather absurd situation if parliament did anything else.
As there is no current talk about restoring the monarchy fully in Romania, to speculate on a line of succession is not within the scope of the law, but as it recognizes the Royal House as an entity and the leader as Crown Princess Margareta, that is a statement in itself.

Cory · #**1116** 07-03-2016, 08:05 AM

This is a project of law which has not arrived to the Parliament yet but there is a public debate about it. It could become law only if voted by the Parliament and promulgated by the president. Let's hope that the public pressure will stop this republican project of ever becoming a law.

LadyRohan · #**1117** 07-03-2016, 09:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cory

This is a project of law which has not arrived to the Parliament yet but there is a public debate about it. It could become law only if voted by the Parliament and promulgated by the president. Let's hope that the public pressure will stop this republican project of ever becoming a law.

Let's hope public support for the Royal Family and the monarchy ensures that the law will pass, the Royal Family will receive some of the support and organization that reigning royal families in other countries get and that it leads to an eventual full restoration.

Jacknch · #**1118** 07-03-2016, 10:24 AM

Is there much general public interest in this proposed law and has there been much on the television news or debate in current affair's programmes?

Cory · #**1119** 07-03-2016, 12:11 PM

There are different articles in the press very much against the project.At the TV less than in the newspapers.

LadyRohan · #**1120** 07-03-2016, 01:42 PM

There are many articles, groupings of monarchists and intellectuals that support it, many of the links I've previously posted. It's been reported well on the news, and it's rather interesting to see politicians supporting a process that was unexpected just a year or two ago.
http://www.secundatv.ro/actualitate/...at-35045.html/ (law text can be found a bit down on this link)