Princess Delphine & Family, News & Events 2; 2023 -

[tihkon2]

I wish she'd just shut up. She's long past being in the right and is now nothing more than an annoying, petty, whiner.

 

[crm2317]

I had never considered the comparison with Princess Marie Esmerelda before. Both are daughters of a king. Why do Delphine’s children have the HRH and prince/princess?

 

[Linda_26]

I had never considered the comparison with Princess Marie Esmerelda before. Both are daughters of a king. Why do Delphine’s children have the HRH and prince/princess?

Because of article 2 of the 2015 Royal Decree regulating royal titles. According to this (badly worded) law all children and grandchildren of King Albert II, without distinction about birth in or out of wedlock, are entitled to be HRH Prince/ss. All his 14 grandchildren (4 from Philippe, 5 from Astrid, 3 from Laurent and 2 from Delphine) therefore have this title. This stops at the grandchildren's generation: his so far three great-grandchildren aren't princes(es) of Belgium, as they are from a collateral line (Astrid's grandchildren).

Esmeralda is a daughter of Leopold III, and not of Albert II (the law of succession was also amended to absolute primogeniture only from Albert's legitimate descendants onwards) and so she wasn't able to pass her style and title of Princess of Belgium to her chidren.

 

[sophie25]

Exactly, Delphine should be included in family events (as indeed she states that it isn't her fault that her parents should never have been in a romantic relationship - she is still family) but there is no reason at all to include her in official royal events; as she is not in line to the throne nor expected to undertake royal duties on behalf of the king, so she is theoretically of no relevance to the Belgian state nor the monarchy (although we've seen in other royal houses that that can still cast a shadow on the royal family). Therefore, I still don't understand why Philip considered it a good idea to include her in the National Day celebrations (the mass for the deceased, however, makes sense).

Yes and he has had no thanks for it, nothing is ever enough for her. I'm actually surprised she hasn't demanded to be included at gala events wearing a tiara.

 

[maria-olivia]

May I ask not to compare Princess Maria Esmeralda with Princess Delphine.
Princess Esmeralda married in 1998 Salvador Moncanda a famous scientist born in Honduras . They have two Children Alexandra and Leopoldo. They never wanted a tittle for their Children living in London..
He has been honored with a Knighthood for his distinguished service to Science.
I spoke several years ago to him , he told me he was Sir Salvador and his wife is Lady Moncanda.

I realy thought Princess Delphine would be there with Jim O' Hare as she asked before (She attends the two events in February and in July 21st)
We have no Government since June and no decisions are taken .
Laurent as working Royal did not attend the Senate Reception and no Show up from Princess Claire without any reasons.

 

[Marchesina]

Because of article 2 of the 2015 Royal Decree regulating royal titles. According to this (badly worded) law all children and grandchildren of King Albert II, without distinction about birth in or out of wedlock, are entitled to be HRH Prince/ss. All his 14 grandchildren (4 from Philippe, 5 from Astrid, 3 from Laurent and 2 from Delphine) therefore have this title. This stops at the grandchildren's generation: his so far three great-grandchildren aren't princes(es) of Belgium, as they are from a collateral line (Astrid's grandchildren).

Esmeralda is a daughter of Leopold III, and not of Albert II (the law of succession was also amended to absolute primogeniture only from Albert's legitimate descendants onwards) and so she wasn't able to pass her style and title of Princess of Belgium to her chidren.

Was it only related to Albert II? I thought the princely title was granted to all the grandchildren of "the king", and that should have included Esmeralda's children. The reason why they are not is she was excluded in the law of succession (possibly because of the morganatic marriage of their parents).

Anyway I don't want to blame Philippe for including her in the celebrations of the National Day, however he should have set boundaries between the private and the public life of the royal family.

 

[Linda_26]

Was it only related to Albert II? I thought the princely title was granted to all the grandchildren of "the king", and that should have included Esmeralda's children. The reason why they are not is she was excluded in the law of succession (possibly marriage of their parents).

Article 2 is specifically only about King Albert II's children and grandchildren:
Arrete Royal du 12/11/2015 arrete royal relatif a l'octroi du titre de prince ou princesse de belgique

In article 1 there's a reference to the "King", which however doesn't mean "any King of the Belgians" (from a rather straightforward, in my opinion, interpretation based on textual evidence), but rather the King in place at the time this royal decree was issued (i.e Philippe).
Esmeralda (and her estranged sister) keep their titles of "Princesses of Belgium" because of Article 3 of the same Royal Decree, as male-line descendants of King Leopold I, but can't pass them to their children.

And titles (or the abilities to pass them on) aren't necessarily related to succession rights: Delphine and her children are titled but aren't in line to the throne. And in the past, daughters of Kings (before Albert II) were titled despite not being in line to the throne because of the Salic Law.

 

[Tatiana Maria]

However, the wording of Article 4, which relates to Princes(ses) who are not Princes(ses) of Belgium, is very close to the wording of Article 2, and it references descendants of Leopold I (which would include Esmeralda's children):

Article 2. In the public and private acts relating to them, the Princes and the Princesses, children and grandchildren, issuing in direct descendance from His Majesty King Albert II carry the title of Prince or of Princess of Belgium following their forename, and, so far as they carry them, their family name and their dynastic title and ahead of the other titles to which their ancestry gives them the right. Their forename is preceded by the predicate His or Her Royal Highness.

Article 4. The Princes and Princesses, issuing in direct descendance from His Majesty Leopold, George, Christian, Frederick of Saxe-Coburg, who are not covered by Articles 1 to 3, carry following their forename and, so far as they carry it, their family name, the titles to which their ancestry gives them the right.​

So, given that the appeals court judge (not the King) interpreted Article 2 to pass the title Princess of Belgium to all children and grandchildren of Albert II, including Delphine and her children, Article 4 should have - to be consistent with the judge's interpretation - been interpreted to pass the title of "Princess" (but not the title "Princess of Belgium") to all descendants of Leopold I, including Esmeralda's children.

But this discussion should probably be moved to

Titles of the Belgian Royal Family 2: 2023 -

Small Arms of Belgium Welcome to the Titles of the Belgian Royal Family thread, part 2 Commencing August 8th, 2023 The previous thread can be found here Please take a look at the TRF Community Rules ***

www.theroyalforums.com

 

[Linda_26]

​

Article 4. The Princes and Princesses, issuing in direct descendance from His Majesty Leopold, George, Christian, Frederick of Saxe-Coburg, who are not covered by Articles 1 to 3, carry following their forename and, so far as they carry it, their family name, the titles to which their ancestry gives them the right.​

So, given that the appeals court judge (not the King) interpreted Article 2 to pass the title Princess of Belgium to all children and grandchildren of Albert II, including Delphine and her children, Article 4 should have - to be consistent with the judge's interpretation - been interpreted to pass the title of "Princess" (but not the title "Princess of Belgium") to all descendants of Leopold I, including Esmeralda's children.

But this discussion should probably be moved to

Titles of the Belgian Royal Family 2: 2023 -

Small Arms of Belgium Welcome to the Titles of the Belgian Royal Family thread, part 2 Commencing August 8th, 2023 The previous thread can be found here Please take a look at the TRF Community Rules ***

www.theroyalforums.com

I was only talking about the title "Princess of Belgium", not any princely title.

In any case, in my opinion, article 4 is worded differently (aside from the beginning) than article 2 and it is clearly impossible to imagine that the Belgian 2015 lawmaker wanted to make "Princes" the hundreds of people descending from King Leopold I. As I interpret it, it will be applied for the first time to Nicolas' and Aymeric's children, who will be "Princes and Princesses" based on their ancestry (male-line descendants of King Leopold I), but won't be covered by article 1-3, and so they will be Princes of Saxe-Cobourg, instead of Princes of Belgium.
My interpretation is probably flawed, but it strikes me as the most reasonable one and I'll leave it at that for the moment as currently I don't have further time to analyze the commas of the royal decree.

 

[MAfan]

I have to say, I fully agree with her, that this antiquated concept of legitimacy still exists is abhorrent. Children are children and should all have the same rights, whether they are born into wedlock or not. That the eldest becomes the monarch is a neccessary evil, but denying the same rights to illegitimate (the whole concept reeks) children like Delphine isn't. And since I do think that way, I applaud her fight, admire her determination. Hopefully she'll, at least, get those responsible to think.

best wishes Michiru

The concept of legitimacy may be abhorrent nowadays, but still it helps to make some clarity and to set fundamental points.
I mean, what if no distinction was set between children - between legitimate and illegitimate children - and now an illegitimate child of King Albert II born before King Philippe jumps out? Who should be the King?
If primogeniture is a necessary evil, IMO also the requirement of legitimacy is equally a necessary evil - just to set a clear line of succession and avoid messy situations.
Is it fair? Perhaps no, but it works.

 

[Tatiana Maria]

I was only talking about the title "Princess of Belgium", not any princely title.

Yes, I know, and I appreciate your precision. But both Princess Esmeralda's children and allegations of inconsistent treatment of descendants were mentioned in the overall discussion in this thread.

In any case, in my opinion, article 4 is worded differently (aside from the beginning) than article 2 and it is clearly impossible to imagine that the Belgian 2015 lawmaker wanted to make "Princes" the hundreds of people descending from King Leopold I. As I interpret it, it will be applied for the first time to Nicolas' and Aymeric's children, who will be "Princes and Princesses" based on their ancestry (male-line descendants of King Leopold I), but won't be covered by article 1-3, and so they will be Princes of Saxe-Cobourg, instead of Princes of Belgium.
My interpretation is probably flawed, but it strikes me as the most reasonable one and I'll leave it at that for the moment as currently I don't have further time to analyze the commas of the royal decree.

I agree with you on King Philippe's intention for Article 4, but likewise, I don't believe King Philippe intended Article 2 to apply to all children and grandchildren of Albert II including Delphine. I've written much more detailed posts on this subject in Titles of the Belgian Royal Family 1: Ending Aug.2023 (and lack the time to write more at the moment), so I will also leave it here for now.

 

[duke of poliganc]

For me I get what Delphine is coming from, I recall that she said in a interview once that once she got the blunt response from Albert about her parentage she said something in line of “See you in court”.

I agree with others who’s said that if Albert treated the situation differently she wouldn’t have turned to attack/revenge mode she would have been happy just with the acknowledgement, if I recall correctly after the court verdict she stated that she want to be treated as other children of Albert, whether it comes to titles, dotation from the government etc!

Also I see no animosity towards the royal family in her latest statement but she clearly directed her criticism towards the government not her siblings or even her father!

Her argument is that her siblings are getting those things because they are the children of Albert not because they are the children of Albert and Paola!

 

[Linda_26]

Her argument is that her siblings are getting those things because they are the children of Albert not because they are the children of Albert and Paola

I'm not sure if I understand what you mean by "these things", but clearly her sibilings are in line to the throne (or on the throne, in Philippe's case) and have engagements on behalf of the monarchy because they are children of Albert and Paola (i.e from a marriage which was consented to by Royal Decree), not just of Albert

 

[duke of poliganc]

I'm not sure if I understand what you mean by "these things", but clearly her sibilings are in line to the throne (or on the throne, in Philippe's case) and have engagements on behalf of the monarchy because they are children of Albert and Paola (i.e from a marriage which was consented to by Royal Decree), not just of Albert

I mean being a working royal, having title for her and her children and being paid by the government as her other siblings have, being invited to governmental events etc,

If the rules for titles for instance is stated that the descendants of Albert and Paola are Prince/ss of Belgium she wouldn’t have got the title of Princess for her and her children but it only mentions Albert!

Is there is an article in the constitution that state that a working royal has to be for instance the child of Albert and Paola, or that they will need to be in the line for succession?

 

[Somebody]

It is not in the constitution but there is a specific law dealing with the dotations (emoluments) for members of the royal family. Even Elisabeth's siblings will not receive a dotation; and Elisabeth (although eligible, is not receiving hers yet). Astrid and Laurent only receive theirs because of a transitional measure. It would not make sense to add a random other member of the family who never expected to base their life on it to that transitional measure; and if so, she should continue to retain the emolument that she was receiving on the date these regulations came in force, which would be €0. And she would be forbidden from receiving any other professional income.

Emoluments

Emoluments are granted to certain members of the Royal Family by special legislation. The relevant legal regulations in force since 1 January 2014 entail some substantial differences from the previous system.

An emolument can only be granted to:
* The presumptive heir to the throne
* The King or Queen who has abdicated
* The surviving spouse of the King or Queen
* The surviving spouse of the King or Queen who has abdicated
* The surviving spouse of the presumptive heir to the throne
Each emolument is set by law at the proposal of the government. The emoluments are entered annually in the common budget programme of the General Expenditure Budget of the Federal State.

His Majesty King Albert II receives an annual emolument for life of €923,000. As a transitional measure, Her Royal Highness Princess Astrid and His Royal Highness Prince Laurent retain their annual emoluments of €320,000 and €307,000 respectively.

(...)

Source: Emoluments | The Belgian Monarchy

 

[Linda_26]

Is there is an article in the constitution that state that a working royal has to be for instance the child of Albert and Paola, or that they will need to be in the line for succession?

Working royals will be (some) people in line to the throne and their spouses. And to be in line to the throne, article 85 says that you have to be a "legitimate descendant" of King Leopold I. In the constitutional sense, "legitimate" means "born from an approved marriage" (I.e approved by royal decree), as it's the case, I think, in every existing royal house. Delphine's parents were never married to each other and therefore she's not in line to the throne. The current line of succession is made only of Albert and Paola's descendants (from Elisabeth, 1st, to Aymeric, 17th).
The titles are a different matter, they are not linked to being in line to the throne and they are regulated by a royal decree which has been mentioned countless times in this thread.
As for the dotation: she has always said, in multiple inteviews , that she doesn't ask for it, as she continues her private carreer (I can't know if it will ever change, of course), but in any case she wouldn't be entitled to it: only Elisabeth will get one in the next generation, and Astrid's and Laurent's were preserved as an exceptional, and transitional measure, that will clearly not be extended to any other person

 

[Stefan]

I'm not sure if I understand what you mean by "these things", but clearly her sibilings are in line to the throne (or on the throne, in Philippe's case) and have engagements on behalf of the monarchy because they are children of Albert and Paola (i.e from a marriage which was consented to by Royal Decree), not just of Albert

And that should also be a requirement to get the Title Prince/Princess of Belgium

 

[Linda_26]

And that should also be a requirement to get the Title Prince/Princess of Belgium

I agree. But as of now, it's not the case

 

[maria-olivia]

When King Baudoin passed away , the new King Albert II asked a Dotation for his 3 Children . . The Prime Minister at that time was Jean Luc Dehaene who said later all his Regrets to have allow this.

 

[Countessmeout]

Honestly now she seems driven by money wonder if she regrets casting off her legal father Jacque Boel. She stood to inherit at least a chunk of a fortune from him. Tossed it aside to go royal.

Its not like she lived in poverty, hidden away with her mother. She had a great life. Arguably Albert should have been in her life when he knew she was aware he was dad. But as a private matter.

She has been granted more then any natural child of a royal and its still not enough.

 

[fabaunty]

Honestly now she seems driven by money wonder if she regrets casting off her legal father Jacque Boel. She stood to inherit at least a chunk of a fortune from him. Tossed it aside to go royal.

Its not like she lived in poverty, hidden away with her mother. She had a great life. Arguably Albert should have been in her life when he knew she was aware he was dad. But as a private matter.

She has been granted more then any natural child of a royal and its still not enough.

She seems like a very bitter, unpleasant woman . She should remember that it was not only Albert who committed adultery , but also her mother . So she has gone from just wanting public recognition as the child of Albert , a result of the long term adulterous affair her mother and Albert had , to now griping because the government did not include her in an event with working Royal's , after stating that she did not want a Donation , or to be a working royal . I understand that Laurent might not do that many official duties , however Astrid , [ and her husband ], have worked tirelessly on behalf of Belgium at home and abroad , especially since Phillipe became king . I absolutely agree that a child should not be held responsible for the actions of their parents , and Phillipe has not done that , both in public and private he has shown her great warmth . However , he is not the government , he reign's not rules . Delphine , her partner , their children have received so much more than other' illegitimate offspring , titles , public recognition etc . In the past children of monarchs not born in marriage were regularly given titles and lands , this has not been the case for many centuries . Delphine was not "excluded" from the event because of her birth ,[ no fault of her's obviously ] , but because she is not a "working royal " . End of story . She seems to want to have all the privileges , no responsibility , you cannot have it both ways .

 

[leidi]

When King Baudoin passed away , the new King Albert II asked a Dotation for his 3 Children . . The Prime Minister at that time was Jean Luc Dehaene who said later all his Regrets to have allow this.

I think he and Paola were most likely thinking about Laurent, because Philippe was always going to get one as future King and Astrid didn't really need it.

Same for the property Paola purchased for Laurent's twins.

 

[An Ard Ri]

Delphine posted a telling statement following comments about her absence from yesterday's King's Day:

Delphine de Saxe-Cobourg on Instagram: "I was reminded again yesterday by the press why I was not invited to celebrate kings Day. The reason is that I do not take a dotation like my brothers and sister. So the fact is that I am not welcome because, i

delphine_de_saxe_cobourg on November 16, 2024: "I was reminded again yesterday by the press why I was not invited to celebrate kings Day. The reason is that I do not take a dotation like my brothers and sister. So the fact is that I am not welcome because, in essence, at the time I was born, my...

www.instagram.com

I didn't miss her at all and I hate to say it but I feel she's only attention seeking yet again.
The 'Poor Me' chorus is starting to get a little repetitious.
Delphine obviously has issues to do with family inclusion but she is really becoming insufferable.

 

[maria-olivia]

Delphine is asking more and more and is never happy.
Now She is affected by the many hate messages she received in a few days.

 

[An Ard Ri]

People will tire of her and I used to have sympathy for her in the past ,
Sadly enough is enough!

 

[sophie25]

At the end of the day only Albert is obliged to indulge her, Paola and Albert's other children owe her nothing at all. If Philipe and his siblings decided upon Albert's death to cut her out of everything official out of loyalty to their mother then I think that would be totally fair. How come Delphine would rather align herself to the family of the father who didn't want her than to the family of her mother, who I would presume, have been closer to her growing up?

 

[Tatiana Maria]

The titles are a different matter, they are not linked to being in line to the throne and they are regulated by a royal decree which has been mentioned countless times in this thread.

I apologize for adding this, as I said I would leave the title discussion for the future, but I missed this point earlier: The 2015 and 1991 royal decrees regulating the title Prince/ss of Belgium refer to the Constitution's laws of succession to the Crown in their preambles. To me, this suggests that King Philippe (2015) and King Baudouin (1991) did intend for there to be a link between the two privileges – even though the judge who granted Delphine her titles felt differently. But I understand that since neither King made a public comment on the issue, their intentions are open to interpretation.

As for the dotation: she has always said, in multiple inteviews , that she doesn't ask for it, as she continues her private carreer (I can't know if it will ever change, of course), but in any case she wouldn't be entitled to it: only Elisabeth will get one in the next generation, and Astrid's and Laurent's were preserved as an exceptional, and transitional measure, that will clearly not be extended to any other person

Thank you for that information. Though it is clear that her statements in interviews are liable to change, as she also said for in multiple interviews over many years that her paternity case was only about recognition and not wishing to become a princess or receive other privileges – until close to the end of the process, when she asked the judiciary to make her a princess (which it did) and grant her the same privileges as her half-siblings (which it did not). And given that it seems unlikely that Parliament or the judges will accede to her request for a dotation, it is impossible to know what her course of action would be if obtaining a dotation were an actual possibility.

 

[maria-olivia]

She is never happy , wants always more and her Children are Prince and Princess of Belgium

 

[Tatiana Maria]

The reason why they are not is she was excluded in the law of succession (possibly because of the morganatic marriage of their parents).

Esmeralda and her children are excluded from succeeding to the throne for two reasons:

1. The Constitution restricts the succession to the throne to legitimate children. Under civil law, Esmeralda's parents were validly married and she was considered to be legitimately born. However, the marriage of her parents was deemed invalid under constitutional law because the government did not give its consent to the marriage. Thus, for the purposes of the Constitution, her parents were never married and so Esmeralda (like Delphine) is considered an illegitimate child who cannot inherit the constitutional throne.

2. It used to be that the Constitution banned females and their descendants from succeeding to the throne. The 1991 constitutional amendment which removed the ban is interpreted to only apply to her half-brother Albert II's descendants, so the ban continues to apply to Esmeralda and her descendants.

For more information see the following thread:

Belgian Abdication, Succession and Constitutional Issues

Several Belgian newspapers yesterday ran the story that King Albert II was supposed to abdicate in December, after Belgium's presidency of the EU ends. According to press reports the 'news' comes from politicians of the Walloon Liberal party (though they do not say who). The king wanted to...

www.theroyalforums.com

 

[Tatiana Maria]

I have to say, I fully agree with her, that this antiquated concept of legitimacy still exists is abhorrent. Children are children and should all have the same rights, whether they are born into wedlock or not. That the eldest becomes the monarch is a neccessary evil, but denying the same rights to illegitimate (the whole concept reeks) children like Delphine isn't. And since I do think that way, I applaud her fight, admire her determination. Hopefully she'll, at least, get those responsible to think.

best wishes Michiru

Princess Delphine's statement acknowledges that the direct reason she is not invited is because she does not take a dotation, rather than her illegitimacy per se. Many born-in-wedlock members of the family, such as Prince Amedeo, do not take dotations and are not invited to official events.

Regarding the general point that children are children and should all have the same rights except when it is a necessary evil, that is very true.

However, in regards to applauding her fight (and this is not directed at you, Michiru-Kaiou, but in general at the applause she receives), it is difficult to understand the very different reactions to Princess Delphine's claim to be fighting for equality for illegitimate children versus the similar case of the late Prince Henrik of Denmark's claim to be fighting for gender equality. In Prince Henrik's case, many people pointed out that he never seemed to care about gender inequality except when it denied a privilege to himself, and very, very few took his claim seriously. As far as I can see, the same is true for Princess Delphine, who does not seem to have publicly advocated for the rights of illegitimate children other than herself. Were she interested in doing so, the obvious place to begin would be to advocate for repealing the ban on illegitimate children inheriting titles of nobility – a right which she, at least, already enjoys, but other illegitimate children do not.

There are also many people (to be clear, Michiru-Kaiou is not one of them, and the following comments are not directed at her) who denounce Delphine's being denied privileges allegedly for her illegitimate birth, but at the same time strongly insist on the correctness of denying privileges to royal or noble children because they are female or because their royal or noble parent is female. The logic of arguing that discrimination against children for being born illegitimate is unfair but discrimination against children for being born female is correct escapes me.