Succession to the Romanian Throne, Part 1

[Cory]

There are two possibilities of Succession to the Romanian Throne:

Line of succession to the Romanian throne - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

New norms of the Royal Family decided by King Mihai I:

http://www.familiaregala.ro/uploads/...entalRules.pdf

[Cory]

Prince Karl von Hohenzollern ( in the line to the Romanian Succesion if we respect the Constitution of 1923) got married again:

Erbprinzessin trägt weißen Schleier - Stadt Nachrichten Sigmaringen | Fotoreportagen | Videos | Sport - schwaebische.de

The Constitution of 1923 has never been legally abolished so depends on the Parliament what decides in the moment of the restoration.
Princess Margareta and her nephew do not use to speak about the restoration of Monarchy but they have a very active role in the society.

The restoration of Monarchy is a constitutional not political issue.In Serbia and Portugal the royal Families speak all the time about the restoration of Monarchy. This is not the Romanian case where Princess Helen's son avoids usually to speak about such a subject.

According to the Constitution of 1923 a Princess of Romania or her descendants can't inherit the Throne. Because some politicians do not really wish to see Princess Margareta's husband as future Prince Consort they will surelly not vote in the case of the Restoration for the end of the Salic Law.

[Kasumi]

New succession claim at Romania's supreme court - November 8th, 2011.

[Cory]

The civil court has no jurisdiction on such matters as the membership of the Royal House.

The Succession to the Romanian Throne is very clear:

http://www.familiaregala.ro/uploads/...entalRules.pdf

[Cory]

According to the 1923 Constitution the Succession would pass to HSH Prince Karl of Hohenzollern:

Preussen.de - Prince Karl Friedrich of Hohenzollern

When the Monarchy will be restored the Parliament will decide about the Succession and about the possibility of the only son of Princess Helen to become King.

[Duc_et_Pair]

I thought Princess Margareta and Princess Elena are before Nicolae? When the monarchy is restored, the crown should -logically- go to Princess Margareta?

[USCtrojan]

I have heard that Prince Karl has no intentions of laying claim to the head of the house upon the passing of HM the King! Does it matter much anymore being that this constitution is no longer In effect? I hope that the people of Romania would not accept the hohenzollerns as head of house or royal family when the king passes.

[Duc_et_Pair]

I believe Prince Karl Friedrich has no interest in the Romanian succession and accepts the "split" from the Hohenzollern-Sigmaringen branch. (The "new" House of Romania being a spin-off with its own succession rules).

[Cory]

The Constitution of 1923 was never legally abolished and this Constitution did not allow women (or their descendants) to inherit the throne. If the Parliament decides Monarchy to be restored it has to decide the line of Succession.

We do not really know which will be the reaction of Prince Karl at the passing away of King Mihai I and in the case of the return of Monarchy.

" If the Romanian Nation and Parliament were to decide to reinstate the Monarchy as the form of government, I ask the Parliament to cease to implement the Salic-law as the form of succession,..." ("Fundamental Rules Of The Royal Family Of Romania", Annex II,1)
HM the King clearly recognizes that only the Parliament can decide the principles for succession and the Line of Succession. Till the Parliament decides there are two possibilities: HSH Prince Karl of Hohenzollern (according to the Constitution of 1923 never legally abolished) of Princess Margareta of Romania (if the salic law would be abolished by the Parliament).

[Admiral Horthy]

It should go to Princess Margarita, not only is she HM's eldest child she has spent a lifetime working for her people, even while being exiled by the illegitimate communist government. Prince Nicolae seems to be following in her steps. They are the logical choices.

Parliment would decide any future succession laws, of course. With any restoration, and I hope that it happens while His Majesty is still living, Prince Margarita would make the logical, and an excellent, choice. She seems to have "the right stuff." From distant observation it seems Prince Nicolae has not only matured but grown more comfortable in his role. Having his aunt precede him would give him a chance not only to continue to grow into his role but also give him a chance to start a family of his own.

Not that my opinion matters but I feel Princess Margarita would make an excellent monarch and regent for her father. I would skip Elena and go right to Nicolae and restart the dynasty with him, after his grandfather and aunt have passed. They could enact legislation specifically dealing with such a succession plan based on the circumstances of this particular situation and then have either absolute or male primogeniture from then on out, depending on how the people feel.

[Admiral Horthy]

Originally Posted by Cory

Princess Margareta and her nephew do not use to speak about the restoration of Monarchy but they have a very active role in the society.

That would probably come across too much like politicking and they no doubt wish to avoid the taint of politics.

[Duc_et_Pair]

Originally Posted by Admiral Horthy

It should go to Princess Margarita, not only is she HM's eldest child she has spent a lifetime working for her people, even while being exiled by the illegitimate communist government. Prince Nicolae seems to be following in her steps. They are the logical choices.

Succession does not look to how active or not active successors are. Princess Elena, Nicolae's mother, is less active and visible but still has a higher claim than Nicolae, purely on base of her birthright. But on itself nothing is logical: neither Margarita nor Elena nor Nicolae are in the line of succession at all, not according to the legislation when Romania was still a kingdom and not according the present Romanian Constitution.

Conservative monarchists probably will also argue that Prince Karl Friedrich von Hohenzollern-Sigmaringen married standesgemäß with Countess Alexandra Schenk von Stauffenberg. That can not be said about the marriages of Princess Margarita and Princess Elena. It is all very theoretical anyway and I don't see a democratically elected president of Romania giving up his position in favour for a Karl-Friedrich von Hohenzollern-Sigmarigen or a Nicholas Medforth-Mills, to be honest.

For a restoration of a monarchy, one need a "kingmaker". That is a strong and powerful man on top of hierarchy. For an example: General Francisco Franco designating Don Juan Carlos de Borbón y Borbón as his heir. Others who could restore the monarchy are -for an example- a push by President Vladimir Putin/Prime Minister Dmitriy Medvedev/Patriarch Kirill of Moscow would be able to restore the Romanovs (as puppets on a ceremonial throne) to crown Russia's re-found grandeur. The same can be said about Prime Minister Orbán and his powerful Fidesz Party in Hungaria. They are able to enforce a restoration. In all other cases, with a democracy and an elected President, I can not imagine a restoration at all.

[branchg]

As things stand now, the succession remains based on the 1923 Constitution, which means Prince Karl would become Head of the Royal House of Romania, not Margarita, when Michael dies.

The King has requested Parliament abolish Salic Law in determining the succession, but that remains a sovereign right of government, not The King. As such, his revised Fundamental Laws of the House have no legal standing or force. These are mere "wishes" on his part.

[Cory]

I suppose theoretically you are right.

There are two issues: the Constitution of 1923 never abolished and with Salic Law and the reaction of the romanian politicians to the question of the Succession

[Duc_et_Pair]

Originally Posted by branchg

...The King has requested Parliament abolish Salic Law in determining the succession...

To which Parliament did King Michael made his request? The Romanian Parliament? There is simply no monarchy in Romania and I wonder of such a request is even subject of a debate?

[Admiral Horthy]

This debate is really pointless in so much as any restoration would require a new constitution and approval by Parliament, which would no doubt stick with decedents of King Michael rather than go with a foreign Prince.

[Jacknch]

Originally Posted by Admiral Horthy

This debate is really pointless in so much as any restoration would require a new constitution and approval by Parliament, which would no doubt stick with decedents of King Michael rather than go with a foreign Prince.

I have to say that I agree. Since becoming a republic, hasn't the Constitution of 1923 been left by the wayside all these decades anyway?
Also, as the Romanian politicians seems to be happy with the semi-official status of the royal family, it would seem pointless to restore the monarchy with anyone else.

[Cory]

Originally Posted by Duc_et_Pair

To which Parliament did King Michael made his request? The Romanian Parliament? There is simply no monarchy in Romania and I wonder of such a request is even subject of a debate?

HM the King was speaking of a decision of the Parliament when the Monarchy is restored.

[Cory]

Originally Posted by Jacknch

I have to say that I agree. Since becoming a republic, hasn't the Constitution of 1923 been left by the wayside all these decades anyway?
Also, as the Romanian politicians seems to be happy with the semi-official status of the royal family, it would seem pointless to restore the monarchy with anyone else.

The Constitution of 1923 has never been abolished because of the will of the people.
The politicians want to offer a semi-official role to the descendants of HM the King with the hope the question of monarchy will be really closed like this.

[Warren]

Originally Posted by Cory

...the Constitution of 1923 has never been abolished...

There's some flawed logic here. If the [Monarchical] Constitution of 1923 was never abolished and contains an impediment to female succession that remains valid in 2014 then Romania remains a monarchy with Michael I as the rightful King. I don't see how some parts of it can be current while others [ie the very nature of the State] are not - that 1923 constitutional document is either still valid or it's not.

In any case, whatever the communist regime replaced it with in 1947 and whatever subsequent changes were made following the revolution of 1989, those rewritings would surely override and/or invalidate the constitution of 1923 in its entirety. A State can't have two quite different written constitutions running concurrently, or picking and choosing between the two.

I'd suggest that King Michael's attempt to have the parliament declare its hand on female succession may have been a roundabout way of gaining (and locking in) the formal official (ie State) recognition of the position and status of his eldest daughter, and indirectly that of his grandson and eventual heir.