Princess Delphine & Family, News & Events 1; 2020 - 2023

[AristoCat]

No it shouldn't, but Delphine shouldn't be getting a title. I don't think Delphine will be welcomed at any family healing sessions and I do not believe that the King and his family will EVER want Delphine at any of their events. Delphine should have refused the title and counted her blessings that she got legal recognition.

 

[leidi]

King Albert Ii and Queen Paola are certainly still on Vacation in Italy.
We will see them on November 15th for the King's Feast.

Hiding as usual, when things get tough they just leave.
Always have done it, always will.
Running away from/ignoring their problems is their motto.

 

[Prinsara]

No it shouldn't, but Delphine shouldn't be getting a title. I don't think Delphine will be welcomed at any family healing sessions and I do not believe that the King and his family will EVER want Delphine at any of their events. Delphine should have refused the title and counted her blessings that she got legal recognition.

Why? For one thing, Albert's uncle's illegitimate daughter (aka, his cousin) Isabelle Wybo has been welcome at things for years and I don't believe was ever denied, certainly not to Delphine levels.

For another, the title is part of the ruling and recognition as Albert's legal child. If she had sought it after this, I think it would have been inappropriate, but she got it part and parcel. And she had to fight damn hard for the legal recognition. Perhaps you should seek to blame the sloppy wording of a decree that could have easily excluded her and didn't.

For a third thing, this extended family would look a lot better if they could actually all just gather in one place and stop generating drama already. I'm not expecting Delphine and Paola or Astrid to ever socialize, but nobody else has an excuse. They do not have to LOVE Delphine, but they certainly don't have to ban her from public events. There is middle ground. There are also impressionable, truly innocent children to take into account now, as well. Could the BRF maybe, just possibly, cut the feud off at this generation? (Maybe Philippe's kids or Laurent's want to get to know Josephine and Oscar, who knows?)

Hiding as usual, when things get tough they just leave.
Always have done it, always will.
Running away from/ignoring their problems is their motto.

At least all of the children are out of the hospital this time.

 

[Marengo]

Hiding as usual, when things get tough they just leave.
Always have done it, always will.
Running away from/ignoring their problems is their motto.

Next week they will be in Belgium next week as they are scheduled to attend the opening ceremony of the military school of Princess Elisabeth, next to the Cinquantenaire.

 

[maria-olivia]

All the Kings of the Belgians had natural Children except King Baudouin. The Children of Leopold I with Arcadie Claret and Leopold II with Blanche de Vaughan, he married at the very end of his life received a Tittle but were no Princes of Belgium.
The Children of Delphine are , nobody understands !

Delphine will speak on Monday the 5th.

 

[Skippy]

King Philippe will not react to Delphine now being a Princess, according to Rafike Yilmaz (palace spokesperson), and neither will the royal palace:
https://www.demorgen.be/nieuws/koni...ine-officieel-prinses-van-belgie-is~b73b923d/

 

[Marchesina]

King Philippe will not react to Delphine now being a Princess, according to Rafike Yilmaz (palace spokesperson):
https://www.demorgen.be/nieuws/koni...ine-officieel-prinses-van-belgie-is~b73b923d/

At this point, I did not expect him to, to be honest. He is in a very delicate position. But, had he been in favour of the ruling a statement of some sort would have been issued. His silence speaks louder.

 

[An Ard Ri]

King Philippe like most of his family has his head firmly in the sand.

 

[Prinsara]

Isn't Philippe responsible for her being a princess? He signed off on the wording of that decree when he could have insisted on "legitimate".

Either he didn't read it — or perhaps he did side with her? Either way, he's not going to comment. At least not now.

 

[Marchesina]

King Philippe like most of his family has his head firmly in the sand.

I don't blame Philippe if he doesn't want to have anything to do with Delphine tbh. She will always be a constant reminder of his father's infidelity and of his unhappy childhood.
I acknowledge Delphine has been deceived by Albert, but let's not forget Philippe grew up with Baudouin and Fabiola. While I am sure he will always be grateful to his uncle and aunt, Delphine had their father by her side while he did not.

 

[Denville]

I don't blame Philippe if he doesn't want to have anything to do with Delphine tbh. She will always be a constant reminder of his father's infidelity and of his unhappy childhood.
I acknowledge Delphine has been deceived by Albert, but let's not forget Philippe grew up with Baudouin and Fabiola. While I am sure he will always be grateful to his uncle and aunt, Delphine had their father by her side while he did not.

Until he ditched her.....

 

[JR76]

It might seem strange in our time of constant airing of one's opinions but sometimes keeping schtum is the best way to get your view across.

 

[tommy100]

I'm 100% of the belief Philippe, Astrid and Laurent can deal with this however they like, there is no right or wrong way and so long as they aren't demanding Delphine's head on a spike and calling her names in public they aren't doing anything wrong IMO. This is their father's mess not theirs.

 

[Prinsara]

I don't blame Philippe if he doesn't want to have anything to do with Delphine tbh. She will always be a constant reminder of his father's infidelity and of his unhappy childhood.
I acknowledge Delphine has been deceived by Albert, but let's not forget Philippe grew up with Baudouin and Fabiola. While I am sure he will always be grateful to his uncle and aunt, Delphine had their father by her side while he did not.

Albert is not winning any Father of the Year awards for any of his children. I would sincerely hope that anything negative Philippe feels is directed to the person responsible. It's not Delphine's fault their father is a jackass.

I'm also fairly sure King Philippe can be reminded of his unhappy childhood perfectly well without any Delphine at all, but since he seems to have worked hard to have a very happy family himself, hopefully less so, these days.

 

[Tatiana Maria]

Isn't Philippe responsible for her being a princess? He signed off on the wording of that decree when he could have insisted on "legitimate".

Either he didn't read it [...]

It may be that he was familiar with the originally intended reading of the wording, which (for the benefit of readers who did not follow yesterday's discussion) is that the phrase "the Princes and the Princesses" limits its application to (already) princely descendants. As a result, it may have never occurred to him that anyone might read it in another way.

But in view of how it slipped his mind that he needed to give his nephew permission to marry (in the interest of fairness, his spokesperson alleged that it was his nephew's forgetfulness and the King simply decided to refrain from reminding him, but that explanation never rang true to me), the possibility that he didn't read it isn't out of the question.

— or perhaps he did side with her?

Very unlikely, as that would be inconsistent with his previous policies and decisions. To repost my analysis from the previous thread:

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.

 

[REAL COUNTESS]

This problem is former King Albert's not Philippe's. Now it is the whole families problem. Maybe Albert should have used his head between the shoulders, to think before he did what he did. Imagen Paola is not happy about it? I still think the Judges lesson for Albert was for every action there is a reaction, lesson learned.??

 

[Prinsara]

It may be that he was familiar with the originally intended reading of the wording, which (for the benefit of readers who did not follow yesterday's discussion) is that the phrase "the Princes and the Princesses" limits its application to (already) princely descendants. As a result, it may have never occurred to him that anyone might read it in another way.

But in view of how it slipped his mind that he needed to give his nephew permission to marry (in the interest of fairness, his spokesperson alleged that it was his nephew's forgetfulness and the King simply decided to refrain from reminding him, but that explanation never rang true to me), the possibility that he didn't read it isn't out of the question.


Very unlikely, as that would be inconsistent with his previous policies and decisions. To repost my analysis from the previous thread:

I don't mean "side with her" as in "yes please, sure, take all the state money and royal duties and housing you'd like", but more along the lines of "...old man screwed you over too, huh? Okay, bonne chance."

If Philippe somehow truly didn't read the thing or was that blindly-advised, then it must just be fate.

 

[Lady Daly]

Delphine de Saxe-Cobourg will speak on Monday, October 5, 2020. "A legal victory will never replace the love of a father, but offers a feeling of justice, which is further reinforced by the fact that many children who have gone through the same ordeals will find the strength to face them there. In the presence of her lawyers, Alain de Jonghe, Yves-Henri Leleu and Marc Uyttendaele, she will speak on this case this Monday, October 5.”
Delphine de Saxe-Cobourg s’exprimera lundi 5 octobre 2020 – Noblesse & Royautés

 

[Eskimo]

Will Delphine appear in a tiara and sit on a throne? Will everyone in the room be made to bow and curtsy to her? ??

 

[Tatiana Maria]

If Philippe somehow truly didn't read the thing or was that blindly-advised, then it must just be fate.

I don't think the wording is deserving of the label of "blindly advised". The fact that it was reused twice and its intended meaning was not contested until 129 years later must be to its credit, surely.

The world is rife with laws whose wording is susceptible to unintended readings. It is arguably impossible for lawmakers to envisage every alternative reading of every sentence they have written. One assumes that is why most countries have courts charged with the responsibility of interpreting laws.

I don't mean "side with her" as in "yes please, sure, take all the state money and royal duties and housing you'd like", but more along the lines of "...old man screwed you over too, huh? Okay, bonne chance."

Sorry, I suppose I don't understand your meaning.

Delphine de Saxe-Cobourg will speak on Monday, October 5, 2020. "A legal victory will never replace the love of a father, but offers a feeling of justice, which is further reinforced by the fact that many children who have gone through the same ordeals will find the strength to face them there. In the presence of her lawyers, Alain de Jonghe, Yves-Henri Leleu and Marc Uyttendaele, she will speak on this case this Monday, October 5.”
Delphine de Saxe-Cobourg s’exprimera lundi 5 octobre 2020 – Noblesse & Royautés

The above was taken from the announcement of the ruling by Delphine's lawyers.

All Belgian newspapers (that I have read) highlight that Delphine will not receive a dotation. There has been made a personal exception explicitly for Astrid and Laurent.

I wonder whether the noticeable omission of the outcome of their requests for "equal privileges and capacities" (dotation, state housing, and so forth) for their client in the attorneys' announcement is an indicator that the court ruled against them on those questions.

 

[Mbruno]

I don't think the wording is deserving of the label of "blindly advised". The fact that it was reused twice and its intended meaning was not contested until 129 years later must be to its credit, surely.

The world is rife with laws whose wording is susceptible to unintended readings. It is arguably impossible for lawmakers to envisage every alternative reading of every sentence they have written. One assumes that is why most countries have courts charged with the responsibility of interpreting laws.




Sorry, I suppose I don't understand your meaning.




The above was taken from the announcement of the ruling by Delphine's lawyers.




I wonder whether the noticeable omission of the outcome of their requests for "equal privileges and capacities" (dotation, state housing, and so forth) for their client in the attorneys' announcement is an indicator that the court ruled against them on those questions.

Has the court ruled on Delphine's inclusion in the line of succession to the throne? I assume that must have been turned down as, unlike the royal decree of 2015, the Belgian constitution is explicit about succession rights being restricted to legitimate descendants of Léopold I.

 

[Tatiana Maria]

Has the court ruled on Delphine's inclusion in the line of succession to the throne? I assume that must have been turned down as, unlike the royal decree of 2015, the Belgian constitution is explicit about succession rights being restricted to legitimate descendants of Léopold I.

The only publicly released information on the ruling, as far as I can see, is the press release from Delphine's lawyers. There was no mention in it of any of the other sought after "privileges" and "capacities", apart from the titles and name.

They may very well have contended that she is a legitimate descendant of Leopold I, with no explicit legal bar to children of unmarried parents being considered legitimate. They have referred to her as "a legitimate child" of King Albert II in their public statements.

We remain in the dark regarding the legal principles that were the basis of the court's ruling. It may have been the decree, or it may not.

For instance, if the court made its ruling on the basis that Delphine's equality with her half-siblings took precedence over any statute, then no degree of explicitness in the writing of the laws could have altered the outcome.

But if the court had taken their side on any of the other royal privileges (succession, finances, etc.), I don't see any reason why the lawyers would not have announced their success proudly. I can only assume that either those decisions have been held for a later date, or the decisions were not in their favor.

 

[*Mara*]

King Philippe like most of his family has his head firmly in the sand.

He reportedly asked his father to recognize Delphine when he suceeded him. And how much misery could have been avoided had he Albert just done that.

And why would Philippe issue a statement at this point? The verdict isn't public yet and much of what is discussed now are speculations. We don't know if Albert wants to appeal the decision. And Delphine is due to give her press conference on Monday. Who knows what she is going to tell and what her plans are? Did she inform her half-brother or his staff? I doubt it. It's not unlikely that Philippe just like the rest of us only learns on Monday what her next steps are. Tricky to issue a meaningful statement under these circumstances. I also wonder why her lawyers broke the news on October 1st and not on Monday when they hold their press conference anyway. They sure could have afforded to wait a bit and not take attention away from the new government which was sworn in that very day. Though with a media obsessed and political lawyer as Marc Uyttendaele it had to be that way perhaps. I guess he will also be the one who is running the show on Monday.


As for the dotation, residency eligibility etc. I doubt Delphine is going for it. It would change her life completely and I'm convinced she will not be able to cope with the consequences. If she wants to be truly equal to her half siblings Astrid and Laurent she wouldn't be able to sell her art any longer, she would have to ask for permission when she travels abroad, she would have to learn Dutch, she would have to refrain from political statements, no more provocative and outspoken interviews, etc pp. Why would she give up her autonomous life for this? Laurent already is unable to follow the rules and he spent all his life as member of the RF. Would a 52 year old woman who is new to all of this really be able to cope with all these new limitations?

 

[Prinsara]

I don't think the wording is deserving of the label of "blindly advised". The fact that it was reused twice and its intended meaning was not contested until 129 years later must be to its credit, surely.

The world is rife with laws whose wording is susceptible to unintended readings. It is arguably impossible for lawmakers to envisage every alternative reading of every sentence they have written. One assumes that is why most countries have courts charged with the responsibility of interpreting laws.

You may be right, and I'm simply requiring the royal court to have more foresight than anyone was capable of five years ago. Perhaps no one was willing to bring up the matter of "King Albert has another child [who could fall under this]" or see the prophylactic use in sticking "legitimate" in the wording.

Sorry, I suppose I don't understand your meaning.

That they both have the same father, who has badly failed them both, in individual ways. I thought that rather than resenting Delphine, it was possible Philippe might even feel a measure of solidarity with her.

Not so much as to give her a theoretical apanage or official housing and go against policy, but enough to let that loophole go through — as a strike against Albert, and all that hurt he's caused, and in Philippe's case, the way Albert's even making his job as sovereign more difficult.

It was just speculation, though.

"Nobody being able to foresee Delphine's multiple court victories" is probably the right answer.

 

[leidi]

I'm 100% of the belief Philippe, Astrid and Laurent can deal with this however they like, there is no right or wrong way and so long as they aren't demanding Delphine's head on a spike and calling her names in public they aren't doing anything wrong IMO. This is their father's mess not theirs.

100% agree.
This is all on Albert's (and probably Paola's) head, they should not get involved whatsoever.
Not their mess to clean.
And frankly, Philippe is much better off keeping quiet about this, he should just keep doing his role as king and let the courts settle the rest, whatever that is.
What a lot of people don't understand is that he's between a rock and a hard place: if he speaks in Delphine's favor, his parents and full sister will get mad at him, if he speaks against Delphine, he will look like a douche.
So it's better to stay quiet.

 

[Prinsara]

100% agree.
This is all on Albert's (and probably Paola's) head, they should not get involved whatsoever.
Not their mess to clean.
And frankly, Philippe is much better off keeping quiet about this, he should just keep doing his role as king and let the courts settle the rest, whatever that is.
What a lot of people don't understand is that he's between a rock and a hard place: if he speaks in Delphine's favor, his parents and full sister will get mad at him, if he speaks against Delphine, he will look like a douche.
So it's better to stay quiet.

Do you really believe Laurent will shut up?

We could start a pool on when he says something.

(Yes, I know it doesn't matter what he says, and yes, Philippe is eminently wise and diplomatic to stay silent.)

 

[Tatiana Maria]

You may be right, and I'm simply requiring the royal court to have more foresight than anyone was capable of five years ago. Perhaps no one was willing to bring up the matter of "King Albert has another child [who could fall under this]" or see the prophylactic use in sticking "legitimate" in the wording.

[...]

"Nobody being able to foresee Delphine's multiple court victories" is probably the right answer.

It is also worth bearing in mind that the court's reasoning is unknown for the moment. They may not have looked to the decree at all.


But it would be quite nice to hear from persons fluent in French, the original language of the royal decrees, because if the contentious part of the decree is translated into English, a language bearing many similarities to French, the original reading strikes me as a bit more straightforward.

The contentious words in Article 2 are as follows.

les Princes et les Princesses, enfants et petits-enfants, issus de la descendance directe de Sa Majesté le Roi Albert II portent le titre de Prince ou de Princesse de Belgique
​

Translated literally into English:

the Princes and the Princesses, children and grandchildren, in direct descent from His Majesty King Albert II carry the title of Prince or of Princess of Belgium
​

To illustrate my meaning, replace these terms:

Replace "the Princes and the Princesses" with "Philippe and Astrid".
Replace "children and grandchildren" with "children".
Replace "carry the title of Prince or of Princess of Belgium" with "receive €1".


The wording that results ought to be

Philippe and Astrid, children in direct descent from His Majesty King Albert II receive €1
​

Following from the earlier discussions here, two possible interpretations suggested by that wording could be

- All of Albert's children qualify to be Philippe and Astrid (and to receive €1). Laurent and Delphine receive the new names Philippe and Astrid, and they become €1 wealthier.​

- The decree is meant to apply only to children of Albert who are already named Philippe or Astrid. Laurent and Delphine keep the same names but miss out on the €1.​

The first one strikes me as more reasonable. But again, I realize it may sound different in French than in the translation, and I would like to hear from various fluent speakers of French.

That they both have the same father, who has badly failed them both, in individual ways. I thought that rather than resenting Delphine, it was possible Philippe might even feel a measure of solidarity with her.

Not so much as to give her a theoretical apanage or official housing and go against policy, but enough to let that loophole go through — as a strike against Albert, and all that hurt he's caused, and in Philippe's case, the way Albert's even making his job as sovereign more difficult.

It was just speculation, though.

Thank you for the clarification. I see the logic of your speculation.

In this case, though, their father seems to have failed Astrid and Laurent in largely the same manner as he failed Philippe, and that solidarity did not prevent Philippe from proactively diminishing the privileges of his sister and brother and their families, sometimes in spite of their protests.

100% agree.
This is all on Albert's (and probably Paola's) head, they should not get involved whatsoever.

I don't think Queen Paola can be held responsible for the choices of her (unfaithful) spouse.

 

[Osipi]

The way I see it is that even with being a Princess of Belgium, possibly gaining perks and such from that standing, to me, its all icing on a cake that was mistakenly made with salt instead of sugar. It will never taste the same.

 

[rominet09]

Osipi, I think your comparison is so right ! A victory obtained that way must leave a bad taste in the mouth.

 

[Prinsara]

The way I see it is that even with being a Princess of Belgium, possibly gaining perks and such from that standing, to me, its all icing on a cake that was mistakenly made with salt instead of sugar. It will never taste the same.

I'm not sure it's about standing. I think it's about protection. Delphine yearned for most of her adult life to not be 'Delphine Boël', or "the King's dirty laundry" as she recently put it. Well, now the world knows the truth, and no one can call her a liar anymore, or see her as a scandal and nothing else. It's protection for her children in the same way, who have undoubtedly been through a lot because of who they are.

"Princess" is as rock-solid an ID badge as you can get. Probably feels good after decades of "bastard". Or the echoing silence from Albert.