Succession to the Romanian Throne, Part 1

[Cory]

Originally Posted by MAfan

While under a very personal point of view I do agree with the last point you expressed, under another point of view I find it very much in contradiction with the pretension that the Royal Family should nowadays still be ruled by the laws in force before 1947, totally ignoring the changes - political, institutional and constitutional, cultural - that have happened in Romania in the past seven decades, as well as in contradiction with the claim that rules and tradictions are unchangeable and untouchable.
On the contrary, I think it is the demonstration (as if we needed it) that also rules and traditions change and evolve with the passing of the time.

Certainly the Constitution of 1923 was not perfect and the Parliament will have to make different changes to it when the Monarchy is restored. Until that moment the Succession remains the one according to the legislation of the Kingdom of Romania.

[LadyRohan]

Originally Posted by Cory

Certainly the Constitution of 1923 was not perfect and the Parliament will have to make different changes to it when the Monarchy is restored. Until that moment the Succession remains the one according to the legislation of the Kingdom of Romania.

Under no circumstances can you trounce the King for stating that as times and circumstances are completely different today than in 1923, he can ignore one article of the constitution, but has to obey another.
It is not the job of so-called supporters to demand which articles of an abolished constitution a monarch still has to obey, and the King has made it clear that just as you claim that they can overlook the second half of article 77, concerning religion, he makes clear that the first half, regarding a ban on female succession, is no longer an acceptable way to run a monarchy in Europe.

In the end, the politicians of any democracy decide on constitutional change, not the King and certainly not zealots who are unable to remain principled when it comes to constitutional matters.
How you manage to justify being so very unprincipled is beyond me.

[Cory]

Now the royalists are more divided than ever on the question of Succession. There are at least three ideas about it: the Hohenzollern Line, the michaelist proposed line with Mr Medforth Mills or another Foreign Prince.

[Cris M]

Would you have a reliable source this time?

[Blog Real]

Obviously the succession must rest on the descendants of King Mihai.

[LadyRohan]

Originally Posted by Cory

Now the royalists are more divided than ever on the question of Succession. There are at least three ideas about it: the Hohenzollern Line, the michaelist proposed line with Mr Medforth Mills or another Foreign Prince.

Unless you can validate these claims with factual or empirical evidence, we'll just have to assume that it's your opinion and not a fact. I have never seen any organization or organized group advocate for the import of a random prince from somewhere, to head up a new monarchy. I've equally still to see any organization or group seeking to get a member of the Hohenzollern family in Germany to Romania, to attempt to place them on a restored throne.

In fact, all I know from the public debate in Romania, is that while there is criticism against some decisions of the King and some aspects of the Royal Family, that is criticism you can find in any monarchy, against any Royal Family. Meanwhile, the only ones working towards a restoration of the monarchy, is the Royal Family and from them is the only viable way forward for the kingdom to return.

I look forward to seeing some evidence of these claims.

[Benjamin]

The adoption by the Romanian Parliament of the Fundamental Rules instituted by King Michael in 2007 will be part of the legislation that is to be passed this autumn regarding the Royal House.

Therefore, the Line of Succession as laid out by His Majesty will become legally sanctioned.

The position of Head of the Royal House of Romania is to be a public dignity.

According to the draft law, the position of Head of the Royal House of Romania will be acknowledged as a public dignity, including the attribution of adopting the Statute of the Royal House of Romania.

“The draft law predictably acknowledges the public activity of the Royal House and establishes a constitutionally available method of acknowledging its Head at the moment of the entrance in force of the law. All these activities will be under the Parliament’s control and the Head of the Royal House will have to annually submit a report to this end”, it is mentioned in the explanatory memorandum of the draft law.

It is also considered that the taken actions “are necessary to continue the activity of a symbol-institution whose leader was the head of the state for a period of 81 years from the Romania’s constitutional history, while since 1947 until today it consists in a landmark of morality, continuity and representativeness of its nation and values”.

The Government appreciates that the social impact of promoting such a draft law will be a positive one, given that by acquiring legal personality and means of cooperating more closely to the state, the Royal House will be able to continue and extend its public activities in the benefit of Romania.

There is also mentioned in the explanatory memorandum that the law is in accordance to the Romanian Constitution “since there are not any privileges established in its regulatory content and it does not aim to cause the review of the Constitution in terms of the form of government”.

The Head of the Royal House of Romania will be acknowledged at the moment of the entrance into force of the law by the Statement of the two joint Chambers of the Parliament, according to the quoted document.

Source article: A Government’s draft law: The Royal House becomes legal entity and an administrative service financed by the state budget | Nine O`Clock

[Cory]

Originally Posted by Benjamin

The adoption by the Romanian Parliament of the Fundamental Rules instituted by King Michael in 2007 will be part of the legislation that is to be passed this autumn regarding the Royal House.

Therefore, the Line of Succession as laid out by His Majesty will become legally sanctioned.

The position of Head of the Royal House of Romania is to be a public dignity.



Source article: A Government’s draft law: The Royal House becomes legal entity and an administrative service financed by the state budget | Nine O`Clock

A Succession to the Throne is not decided by republican authorities.

[LadyRohan]

Originally Posted by Cory

A Succession to the Throne is not decided by republican authorities.

Yes. Succession in the case of a restoration is decided by politicians. They make a call who to offer the throne to, based on who is respected and wanted by Romanians.
You need to get over the 'republican authorities' train, politicians are here to stay, and if you want to affect change, you work with them. The alternative will achieve nothing.

[Cory]

The Succession will be certainly decided by the Parliament when the Monarchy is restored.

[LadyRohan]

Originally Posted by Cory

The Succession will be certainly decided by the Parliament when the Monarchy is restored.

You have the process backwards. Parliament won't restore the monarchy, then decide who to offer the throne to. The monarchy as an institution has to be represented by someone, that's the point of the Royal Family.
A pretender is named, the case of the monarchy under said person is presented to the public, most likely a referendum is held and the monarchy is restored with the pretender assuming the throne.

Politicians won't choose someone who can't win a referendum, hence why most arrows still point to Nicholas. He is the Kings only grandson, and the emotional ties to the past of the monarchy is what will be played up in the event of a restoration.

That's how you win this cause.
There's no other viable way.

[Cory]

The Succession can't be decided BEFORE the restoration of Monarchy.

There is a very clear Succession according to the laws of the Kingdom of Romania.

[Archduchess Zelia]

On the contrary, you can't restore a monarchy without having the line of succession decided upon first.

[LadyRohan]

Originally Posted by Cory

There is a very clear Succession according to the laws of the Kingdom of Romania.

Do we really need to do this on a weekly basis?
There is no kingdom of Romania. There is a Royal Family in a former monarchy, and if the institution is to be restored, it will logically and naturally be based on democratic and modern principles, not importing some random member of a German family not relevant to current-day Romania, because the women in the Royal Family aren't good enough for some people to be monarchs in a new kingdom.

[Cory]

There are the monarchists that respect the constitutional traditions of the Kingdom of Romania as well as Russian monarchists respecting the Laws of the Succession of the Empire of Russia or French royalists respecting the Laws of Succession of the Kingdom of France.
The daughters of the King of Romania are not dynasts and that is not something unique in Europe: the Orleans or the Savoys are exactly in the same situation.

[LadyRohan]

Originally Posted by Cory

There are the monarchists that respect the constitutional traditions of the Kingdom of Romania as well as Russian monarchists respecting the Laws of the Succession of the Empire of Russia or French royalists respecting the Laws of Succession of the Kingdom of France.
The daughters of the King of Romania are not dynasts and that is not something unique in Europe: the Orleans or the Savoys are exactly in the same situation.

No, they are not.
The Savoys are a large family with many people to choose from if and when a succession issue arises, and once again, I can assure you that the monarchy will not return to Italy and deny women the right to reign.
It will not happen, in the European Union, in Europe and frankly, in the Western world, in this day and age. The daughters of the Prince of Venice are the direct heirs to the last King, and to disregard that just because they're women is pathetic. Frankly, it's also completely contrary to your views as of two years ago, when you advocated for Crown Princess Margareta and the Royal Family of Romania. To be so unprincipled is just a distraction from the greater cause, and does nothing to further the issue.

Restoring the monarchy in Romania or any other land is not an issue for debating clubs or meetings of sad people in dungeons somewhere. It's a political and social issue, that cannot find a way forward without involving politicians and gaining their support, and waging a realistic and appropriate PR-campaign towards the public, to ensure their support.

The old constitution is dead. It should be left in peace, so that those who are actively seeking to return the monarchy to Romania and for the Royal Family to return to the throne, have all the support they can possibly get, from everyone claiming to be on the side they represent.

[Duc_et_Pair]

Originally Posted by LadyRohan

[...] not importing some random member of a German family not relevant to current-day Romania, because the women in the Royal Family aren't good enough for some people to be monarchs in a new kingdom.

You yourself seem to overlook the female-only line of succession by quite often pointing to the no longer relevant Nicholas Medforth-Mills as Romania's only option?

Moreover it not "some random member from a German family" it is the very same family as King Michael and his daughters were born into and always belonged to until 30 December 2007.

It is also not "some random member" but persons in line of the succession according exactly the same rules which "delivered" Michael his throne and which was still the one and only line of succession until King Michael changed it by his own hand, nine years ago.

I would like to make that nuance. You sound as if a roulette ball stops with a certain German princely family and that then a dart is thrown to choose a prince or so. It is exactly the opposite. The one whom turned a respected Royal House into a casino with a Russian roulette is exactly King Michael.

You never know when you are in or out. And when you are thrown out you will not be told why. And when soneone else made a mistake, you can also be punished and be thrown out of the succession. Welcome in the Casino of Monte-Carlo, eh..., Bucharest.

[LadyRohan]

Originally Posted by Duc_et_Pair

You yourself seem to overlook the female-only line of succession by quite often pointing to the no longer relevant Nicholas Medforth-Mills as Romania's only option?

Moreover it not "some random member from a German family" it is the very same family as King Michael and his daughters were born into and always belonged to until 30 December 2007.

It is also not "some random member" but persons in line of the succession according exactly the same rules which "delivered" Michael his throne and which was still the one and only line of succession until King Michael changed it by his own hand, nine years ago.

I would like to make that nuance. You sound as if a roulette ball stops with a certain German princely family and that then a dart is thrown to choose a prince or so. It is exactly the opposite. The one whom turned a respected Royal House into a casino with a Russian roulette is exactly King Michael.

You never know when you are in or out. And when you are thrown out you will not be told why. And when soneone else made a mistake, you can also be punished and be thrown out of the succession. Welcome in the Casino of Monte-Carlo, eh..., Bucharest.

The one who made a realistic and relevant choice was the King, who recognized that German, distant relations who had no role in the Royal Family and no active participation or interest in Romania, had no part in the future of the Romanian dynasty. He undertook to suggest a new way forward, including women, which I still cannot believe has to be argued (but I see some people have to be dragged into this century).
The argument has never been to displace women by installing Nicholas as King. The argument goes to where to go following the Crown Princess, and that is logically to the very same grandson, as he is the most viable choice.

The phrase 'random member' refers to the point that Romanians in general will never understand or accept some person not only that they do not know who is, has no connection to Romania and has no standing in their eyes, to assume a throne they're asked to restore.
The monarchy can never return under those conditions, but since your stance all along has been to not restore the monarchy at all, I really don't see the premise of your comments.

[Cory]

Will the Romanians accept again like in 1866 and 1889 a Prince of Hohenzollern or they would prefer the daughter in law of a left wing politician?This is the question.

[Benjamin]

Originally Posted by Duc_et_Pair

Moreover it not "some random member from a German family" it is the very same family as King Michael and his daughters were born into and always belonged to until 30 December 2007.

The Hohenzollern name and titles were done away with in May 2011.

Henceforth, the Romanian royal family bears the name and titles of only their country. This decision was pragmatic and shrewd. It is completely in keeping with what plenty of other Royal Houses have done in similar circumstances.

In ending, one must borrow a quote from the first article that perfectly sums up the situation: "King Michael did the right thing. Clueless armchair Ruritanians are talking out of their armpits, and do not have a real sense of why things are done."

See:

Royal Musings: Michael ends dynastic link with Hohenzollerns

Motivul pentru care Casa Regala a Romaniei a rupt legatura cu Hohenzollern

Filip-Lucian Iorga : “Casa Regala a Romaniei nu are de ce sa ramana legata acum de zona umbroasa a familiei de Hohenzollern� - Esential - HotNews.ro

Regele Mihai I a rupt legăturile istorice şi dinastice cu Casa de Hohenzollern | adevarul.ro

Istoria conflictelor dintre Casa Regală a României şi Casa Princiară de Hohenzollern | adevarul.ro

Regele Mihai anunţă ruperea legăturilor istorice şi dinastice cu Casa de Hohenzollern - Mediafax