Regency Plans For European Monarchies.


If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.

amaryllus

Royal Highness
Joined
Jul 15, 2013
Messages
1,730
City
bedford
Country
United States
The Contingency plans for the House of Orange has been released. What are the plans for Sweden, Belgium, ETC.?
 
The Contingency plans for the House of Orange has been released. What are the plans for Sweden, Belgium, ETC.?

Interesting question. I am not sure what the plans are for other countries.


but I got to wondering atter reading this if Queen Elizabeth lives to 101 like her Mother (not impossible but unlikely as one poster said). you really can't expect her to be a active monarch at that age like she is now and she is already starting to slow down a little bit. At what point would Prince Charles have to step in and act as Regent if she does live to 100? Woud it be by her 95th Birthday or after if she still living by then?
 
The law in the UK is very clear on when a Regency is needed - when the monarch is incapable of carrying out the duties of the monarch.

So when could Charles become Regent? If and when the required 3 people declare her incompetent to continue.

That could be as early as tomorrow (not likely but if she had a fall which caused some brain damage) or as late as never.

Only if she can't carry on her duties will their be a regency - mind you those duties are the constitutional duties only - the showy things such as Trooping the Colour are to entertain the masses and not anything she has to do.
 
A Regency in the UK would only happen if Parliament decided HM was unable to undertake her duties due to some mental incapacity. There is no age limit on being monarch so being 95 or 100 does not matter as long as the mind still works. All of the monarchs public functions can be done by other members of the family as they are not constitutional requirements.
 
In the Sally Bedell bio of the queen it was stated that she would step down or Charles would step in if she had, say, a stroke or Alzheimers. Take it with a grain of salt but it rings true.
 
In the Sally Bedell bio of the queen it was stated that she would step down or Charles would step in if she had, say, a stroke or Alzheimers. Take it with a grain of salt but it rings true.

If she had a stroke or Alzheimer's a regency would be established under the regency act as she wouldn't be fit to rule. I don't think she'd be able to abdicate though, as she would have to be of a certain mental fitness in order to do so.
 
Periods of lucidity occur in Alzheimers sufferers and if she strokes, recovery enough to communicate her wishes in likely depending on the severity.
 
That is true, although can you imagine the field day tabloids would have with that one? I can see the headlines now "Charles Forces Dying Mother to Abdicate."
 
Power to make the declaration of incapacity and the declaration of cessation of incapacity

According to the Regency Act 1937, if "the following persons or any three or more of them, that is to say, the wife or husband of the Sovereign, the Lord Chancellor, the Speaker of the House of Commons, the Lord Chief Justice of England, and the Master of the Rolls, declare in writing that they are satisfied by evidence which shall include the evidence of physicians that the Sovereign is by reason of infirmity of mind or body incapable for the time being of performing the royal functions or that they are satisfied by evidence that the Sovereign is for some definite cause not available for the performance of those functions, then, until it is declared in like manner that His Majesty has so far recovered His health as to warrant His resumption of the royal functions or has become available for the performance thereof, as the case may be, those functions shall be performed in the name and on behalf of the Sovereign by a Regent."[4]
Thus, the persons capable of making a declaration of incapacity (or a declaration of cessation of incapacity) are the consort of the Sovereign, the Lord Chancellor, the Speaker of the House of Commons, the Lord Chief Justice of England and the Master of the Rolls. As of 2013 these positions were held by, respectively, the Duke of Edinburgh, Chris Grayling, John Bercow, Lord Judge, and Lord Dyson.
Any declaration of incapacity or of cessation of incapacity needs to be signed by three or more of them. Declarations based on the monarch's unavailability for a definite cause need to be supported by evidence, and declarations attesting the Sovereign's incapacity by reason of infirmity of mind or body need to be supported by evidence including evidence provided by physicians.
According to the Regency Act 1937, any declaration of incapacity or of cessation of incapacity needs to be made to the Privy Council.
Regency Acts - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 
I reckon that if QMII dies, Frederik becomes King and then dies before Christian is eighteen, our Regency plans would be much alike the Dutch ones. With Mary becoming Queen regent in Christian's stead until he comes of age.
 
I reckon that if QMII dies, Frederik becomes King and then dies before Christian is eighteen, our Regency plans would be much alike the Dutch ones. With Mary becoming Queen regent in Christian's stead until he comes of age.


That probably makes sense.
 
Regency for "minor" monarchs..

Since the thread surfaced after the Dutch plans, I think we should discuss a bit about the Regency plans for underage monarchs..

See it is usual that if a monarch is less that 18, the next person in line to the throne over 18.. most likely the sibling of the deceased monarch will be the regent.

However both in the olden days and now, many monarchies are making a change..Instead of naming the next one in line to the throne, they are naming the consort of the dead monarch, who is almost always a parent of the child-monarch as regent.. Then the DoE and now Maxima

So..Whom do you prefer as Regents?
The Consorts of Deceased monarchs or The Persons next line (siblings of deceased monarchs)?

I put my points for and against both these views..

The consorts are always popular and acceptable to people. For example, there is no doubt the DoE would have been a better regent than Princess Margaret who was known more for her romantic escapades than duties in those decades..Similarly Maxima is more popular and automatically acceptable to people..
Thus if consorts are active, more responsible and acceptable, they can be great Regents..

But what I feel against this system is..
The consort is always an outsider. An outsider to the family or even to the country.
And their main purpose is to "accompany" than to function. They may not be always responsible or as sincere/devoted/patriotic to their sense of duty/ultimate goodwill of their nation.
But the siblings of a sovereign will always be. They were born and raised as children of the monarch and will be as patriotic and duty-minded as their dead sibling-monarch. And actually most second sons are also as popular and acceptable to people as regents..

So I want opinions of you..which person do you support being regent, and more importantly WHY..Your answer can vary between different countries, and you can also give examples..
 
The Dutch and Belgium thrones both have underaged heirs as the next in line plus underage spares. I think the parent of the new monarch should be the reagent. They would have the best interest of their children in mind.
 
I reckon that if QMII dies, Frederik becomes King and then dies before Christian is eighteen, our Regency plans would be much alike the Dutch ones. With Mary becoming Queen regent in Christian's stead until he comes of age.

No, that would be Joachim. He is the next adult in line and will act as Rigsforstander until Christian turns eighteen.
The second Christian has signed a pledge to obey the Constitution on his eighteenth birthday he will be king.

Mary will still keep her title as queen until she dies or remarry. It is also very likely she may from time to time act as Rigsforstander if Joachim is out of the country. Simply due to her experience. Otherwise it would be likely Nikolai will start to step in as well. - But the timespan for all this happening is narrowing down.
 
Last edited:
imo it's good that this is decided on case-for-case basis... Regency should be with someone who knows the royal-affairs really well, preferably on a day to day basis, but this can both be the other parent (after several years in the 'business') or the next in line. In the dutch situation imo both options (Maxima and Constantijn) are equally good, both are well respected and dedicated to the 'job'.
However the next in line isn't automatically best suited for it...not everyone who is in line to a trone is cut out to be so..
 
Spanish regency

For Spain:

The constitution outlines the regency of the monarchy and guardianship of the person of the monarch in the event of his minority or incapacitation.[3][5] The office of Regent(s) and the Guardianship of the monarch (whether the monarch is in his minority or incapacitated), may not necessarily be the same person. In the event of the minority of the monarch, the surviving mother or father, or oldest relative of legal age who is nearest in line to the throne, would immediately assume the office of Regent, who in any case must be Spanish.[3][5] If a monarch becomes incapacitated, and that incapacitation is recognized by the Cortes Generales, then the Prince of Asturias (the heir apparent), shall immediately become Regent, if he is of age. If the Prince of Asturias is himself a minor, then the Cortes Generales shall appoint a Regency which may be composed of one, three, or five persons.[3][5] The person of the king in his minority shall fall under the guardianship of the person designated in the will of the deceased monarch, provided that he or she be of age and of Spanish nationality.[3][5] If no guardian has been appointed in the will, then the father or mother will then assume the guardianship, as long as they remain widowed. Otherwise, the Cortes Generales shall appoint both the Regent(s) and the guardian, who in this case may not be held by the same person, except by the father or mother of direct relation of the king.[3][5]
 
I reckon that if QMII dies, Frederik becomes King and then dies before Christian is eighteen, our Regency plans would be much alike the Dutch ones. With Mary becoming Queen regent in Christian's stead until he comes of age.

Is there any Danish royal documentation that states that there would have to be two regents or two co-regents?
For example: Christian's mother Mary and her brother-in-law, Prince Joachim.
 


Is there any Danish royal documentation that states that there would have to be two regents or two co-regents?
For example: Christian's mother Mary and her brother-in-law, Prince Joachim.
As the only persons (besides crown prince Frederik) who are available as regents of Denmark at the moment are prince Joachim and princess Benedikte, as a regent have to be in line for the throne and of age, it wouldn't be possible for Mary to become regent for her children.

As for Sweden, the Order of Succession says that if the monarch is incapable a member of the royal family who is in the order of succession and of age becomes regent (that is, at the moment Victoria, Carl Philip and Madeleine). If there are no members of the royal family available, the the Swedish parliament (after suggestion from the government) can name a temporary regent. If there is no others suitable, then the speaker of the parliament will act as a regent. As it's possible for the government and parliament to name a temporary regent for a heir who's a minor, it could theoretically possible to name the spouse of the monarch or the spouse of a member of the royal family as a regent, for example prince Daniel as a regent for Estelle.
 
The Contingency plans for the House of Orange has been released. What are the plans for Sweden, Belgium, ETC.?

The Act on the appointment of a Regent and the guardianship in the Netherlands is not really about being regent for the incapacitated King: the Constitution already provides in this. This Act "only" designates who will execute the royal prerogatives when the new Queen is still a minor, meaning that her father, the present King, is dead.

When the Princess of Orange becomes Queen but has not reached the age of 18, Queen Máxima will be appointed Regentess of the Kingdom. A board of guardians will take care of the interests of the young Queen (they have the power to block the Regentess when she acts against the interests of her own daughter, for an example sell Orange-Nassau properties, as these belong to the underaged Queen).

When also Queen Máxima is dead, the young Queen's uncle Prince Constantijn will be appointed Regent of the Kingdom. A board of guardians will take care of the interests of the young Queen (they have the power to block the Regent when he acts against the interests of his own niece).


:flowers:
 
Last edited:
So..Whom do you prefer as Regents?
The Consorts of Deceased monarchs or The Persons next line (siblings of deceased monarchs)?


It depends on the situation and people.

Monaco: I would prefer Caroline rather than Charlene. I like Charlene but 1. She has only been consort for less than 4 years so its not like she has 20 years experience or something. 2. She was not born or raised in Monaco so its not like she has life long ties to the country 3. She doesn't have higher education. In Monaco the sovereign actually has power and runs the country the sovereign needs to be someone educated. 4. She does not speak French which is one of their official language. I just can't imagine someone as head of the country who can't even speak the language.

Spain: I would prefer Letizia over Elena (Cristina is not even a real option at this point with her scandal). 1. Since JC abdicated Elena is no longer part of the royal family or hold any royal role. Letizia is already Queen and has been working a lot. I feel like at this point Letizia is just more involved and aware of everything going on in the monarchy than Elena. So a smother transition to make Letizia regent over Elena. 2. Leticia is not a novice. Had many years of experience as Princess of Asturias and obviously now she is completely in full-time working mode as Queen.

Netherlands and Denmark: Maxima and Mary. Even though both were foreigners they are very popular in their countries. Both have experience and have shown to be hard working and just have earned the respect of their people.

Sweden: I just don't know. Daniel has done a great job as a prince of Sweden but he only has 5 years experience. But Carl-Philip hardly has done anything and people don't even like Madeline.

Belgium and Norway: I don't follow these countries so I don't really know what is going on with Mathilde and Mette-Marit and if they would make go regents.

UK: I would prefer Harry over Kate. I love Kate but at this point in time neither has done enough in my opinion to be Regents (they haven't attended a single State diner) So at least Harry has been part of the royal family his entire life. (In a scenario where the Queen, Charles, and William are dead and only George is left the best solution would be to skip everyone in the line of succession as just go for the Princess Royal to be regent though)

Luxembourg: Since Guillaume has no children automatically Felix, But if they did I would still pick Felix over Stephanie. Out of all the Crown Princesses by far Stephanie is the least hard working of them all. She has very little experience.
 
^^^IMO Mathilde would be the logical choice as regent. She'd have the advice of King Albert if he was still alive. The same would apply to Maxima and Letizia as well in that they could have the advice of a former monarch if they were still living.
 
As for Sweden, the Order of Succession says that if the monarch is incapable a member of the royal family who is in the order of succession and of age becomes regent (that is, at the moment Victoria, Carl Philip and Madeleine).


I believe that matter is regulated by the Instrument of Government, rather than the Act of Succession.

"[FONT=Arial,Helvetica]Chapter 5 The Head of State

[...]

Article 3
If by reason of illness, foreign travel, or any other cause the King is prevented from carrying out his duties, then that member of the Royal Family under the valid order of succession who is not prevented therefrom shall take over and perform the duties of the Head of State in the capacity of temporary Regent.


Article 4
(1) Should the Royal Family become extinct, the Parliament shall appoint a Regent to perform the duties of Head of State until further notice. The Parliament shall at the same time appoint a Deputy Regent.
(2) The same applies if the King dies or abdicates and the heir to the throne has not yet attained the age of twenty-five years
."


It is worth noting BTW that, unlike the previous Instrument of Government, the new Instrument of Government adopted in 1975 no longer says that the Swedish Parliament must elect a new king if the the Royal Family becomes extinct. Instead, the constitution only provides for a Regent to be appointed to perform the duties of Head of State "until further notice" (i.e. on a temporary basis). Some observers have interpreted that as an indication that, should the House of Bernadotte become extinct, Sweden would probably become a republic.
[/FONT]
 
Last edited:
In the Netherlands the regency has always been observed by the closest family:

1650-1668 - The Dowager Princess of Orange, born Princess Mary Henrietta Stuart, The Princess Royal, was Regentess for her underaged son Prince Willem III of Nassau, The Prince of Orange

1696-1707 - The Dowager Princess of Orange, born Princess Henriette Amalia von Anhalt-Dessau, was Regentess for her underaged son Prince Johan Willem Friso of Nassau, The Prince of Orange

1759-1765 - The Dowager Princess of Orange, born Princess Marie-Luise von Hessen-Kassel, was Regentess for her underaged son Prince Willem IV of Nassau, The Prince of Orange

1751-1759 - The Dowager Princess of Orange, born Princess Anne of Great Britain and Hannover, The Princess Royal, was Regentess for her underaged son Prince Willem V of Nassau, The Prince of Orange

1890-1898 - The Dowager Queen of the Netherlands, born Princess Emma von Waldeck und Pyrmont, was Regentess for her underaged daughter Queen Wilhelmina of the Netherlands, Princess of Orange-Nassau

1947 - Princess Juliana was Regentess for her mother Queen Wilhelmina of the Netherlands, Princess of Orange-Nassau

1948 - Princess Juliana was Regentess for her mother Queen Wilhelmina of the Netherlands, Princess of Orange-Nassau
 
^^^IMO Mathilde would be the logical choice as regent. She'd have the advice of King Albert if he was still alive. The same would apply to Maxima and Letizia as well in that they could have the advice of a former monarch if they were still living.

I think Princess Astrid would make a better regent than Queen Mathilde as she seems to be more knowledgeable of state affairs. What do the Belgian posters think ?
 
I think Princess Astrid would make a better regent than Queen Mathilde as she seems to be more knowledgeable of state affairs. What do the Belgian posters think ?

The state affairs are in hands of the ladies and gentlemen politicians. Queen Mathilde is the mother of the -then- underaged Queen Elisabeth. Without any doubt she will be appointed Regentess and not Princess Astrid.

Besides that, most likely (as always has been the case in neighbouring Netherlands) the interests of the underaged Sovereign will be in hands of a Board of Guardians. For an example, mama Máxima - being Regentess - will not be able to do any transaction which possibly will not be in the interest of her underaged daughter. I can imagine that also in Belgium the underaged Queen, guided by her mother the Regentess, will be "guarded" in a similar way.
 
As others pointed out its interesting that should the need for a Regent arise now a days several European monarchies have abdicated Kings/Queens/Gran d Duke's to call upon. Whilst they might not act as Regent themselves they would be a good source of advice and guidance.
 
As others pointed out its interesting that should the need for a Regent arise now a days several European monarchies have abdicated Kings/Queens/Gran d Duke's to call upon. Whilst they might not act as Regent themselves they would be a good source of advice and guidance.

In most cases the underaged Sovereign is guided and protected by a Board of Trustees, Governors, Guardians, give it a name, which has to be informed (and has to give consent) on almost everything. From the education of the young monarch to the management of his/her private assets. From leaving the country to the decision to purchase a nice artwork for the collection. From the appointment of a new Treasurer to the design of the young monarch's new Coat-of-Arms. The Board will want to see that the interests of the young monarch are safeguarded.

This means that the Regent (Regentess) simply acts as the (largely ceremonial) representant of the minor head of state: receiving guests of State, signing Acts and Royal Decrees (in the name of the monarch), reading the Address from the Throne, invest new ministers and other high offices of state, "doing" state visits, etc. It is all largely ceremonial. The real power inside the regency lies in the largely invisible Board.
 
Question on Regency

Hello all, I am an author writing a book and I plan to have a regency in it. Though I have no idea of how/when a regency is used beyond that the monarch is dead and their heir is unable for whatever reason to rule. In this case though it is due to the heir being under the age of 18.
(also I apologize if this is in the wrong place if it is, admin feel free to move it)
So my questions are:
1. How exactly would the regency work in terms of the heir being in his minority?
2. How would the heir and regent be addressed and styled?
3. Is there any protocol for a regent that I need to know of? (I like be accurate as possible and correct in terms and other various things)
4. How/when does the regent find out they are now the regent?
5. Is the heir still informed that the monarch is dead?
6. When does the coronation for the heir take place?
Thank you for taking the time to answer all my questions and I thank you for replying to them.
Red Lotus.
 
Depends on the country and period.

1) In modern times, and I think this roughly applies to all the European monarchies, a minor heir will have a guardian appointed (usually a close relation, like a surviving parent or an uncle/aunt) and a regent will be appointed to act on behalf of the heir, That would likely be the next adult in the line of succession and that most likely means an uncle/aunt.

2) The heir would be addressed according to the normal protocol i.e. crown prince/ss (or the equivalent title) XX and the regent with his/her usual title. Normally only documents would contain the title of regent.

3) As for protocol. Again, that depends on the country. And in regards to what?

4) When he/she is told presumably. Or read about in a magazine or see it on the news. The question is more when do the heir comprehend he/she is the next king/queen and what it means.

5) Unless the heir is an infant there is no reason not to tell her/him.

6) When he/she has come of age. In modern sense at the age of eighteen.
 
Last edited:
In countries like Sweden or the Netherlands, and I suppose also in Belgium, the regent is chosen by the country's parliament and doesn't necessarily have to be the next adult in line to the throne. For example, if I am not mistaken, it has been decided in the Netherlands that, if Princess Amalia ascends the throne before turning 18, her mother, Queen Maxima, will serve as regent if available, as opposed to her uncle, prince Constantijn. I also believe that, in Spain, the constitution explicitly gives precedence to a surviving parent over the next adult in line to be the regent. Conversely, in the UK, I believe the law says the next adult in line automatically becomes the regent.

In summary, rules change from country to country and you may choose any of the aforementioned models for your novel.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom