Restoration of the Monarchy in Romania

[CSENYC]

After the Brexit vote, even unlikely events are possible, but the monarchy will be restored only if a majority (or at least more than today) of Romanian voters want it restored.

I generally prefer constitutional monarchy with limited powers of the monarch, so I'd like it restored. So royalists and the Royal Family need to do more to convince more voters of the need for restoration.

 

[Duc_et_Pair]

What better to convince Romanians about the value of a monarchy than a proper working royal family, with sound organisation and transparent finances? I see opportunities in the offer by the State of Romania. There is no alternative. Being penniless, without organization and depending on thirds is no recipe for a sustainable future.

 

[CSENYC]

I agree with Duc et Pair.

In addition, look at the Royal Family: King Michael is a saint, and Crown Princess Margareta is wonderful, but look at the rest of them: I understand that Prince Radu is unpopular, the rest of them don't even bother living in Romania, and one has a criminal record. None of them have accomplished amazing things in the private sector or made a lot of money, compared to, for example, the Greek royal family, which would be a high-profile family even if it wasn't royal.

After King Michael is gone, the Royal Family would be on a fast path to irrelevance, as commoners, except for this sudden opportunity to be an official Royal Family again.

 

[Cory]

Come on. What else do you expect? Romania is a republic. That is the situation. You yourself admitted on this very board that there is no desire in Romania to swap the republic for a hereditary monarchy.

The State of Romania, while not at all obliged to do, wants to make a civil and prudent agreement with the former royal family. Like so many other states have done. Open up your eyes, it is 2016. The monarchy will never be restored.

How do you know the Monarchy will never be restored?

 

[Cory]

I agree with Duc et Pair.

In addition, look at the Royal Family: King Michael is a saint, and Crown Princess Margareta is wonderful, but look at the rest of them: I understand that Prince Radu is unpopular, the rest of them don't even bother living in Romania, and one has a criminal record. None of them have accomplished amazing things in the private sector or made a lot of money, compared to, for example, the Greek royal family, which would be a high-profile family even if it wasn't royal.

After King Michael is gone, the Royal Family would be on a fast path to irrelevance, as commoners, except for this sudden opportunity to be an official Royal Family again.

They have nothing to do with the restoration of Monarchy even if they will have a sort of republican recognition.

 

[Cory]

After the Brexit vote, even unlikely events are possible, but the monarchy will be restored only if a majority (or at least more than today) of Romanian voters want it restored.

I generally prefer constitutional monarchy with limited powers of the monarch, so I'd like it restored. So royalists and the Royal Family need to do more to convince more voters of the need for restoration.

The royalists need to have a clear strategy for the future and need to be completly disconnected with those preparing a republican compromise.

 

[CSENYC]

Cory, based on your posts, it sounds like the Royal Family doesn't care about restoration. I doubt that, but if it's true, then in order to have a restoration, Romania will need a different Royal Family. It also sounds like the royalists who want a restoration want nothing to do with this new official status for the Royal Family.

If that's the case, then there is zero chance of a monarchy being restored: a Royal Family that doesn't push for it, a need for a brand-new royal family and royalists who don't really want what the Royal Family is accepting. What you have is a complete mess, if the goal is restoration.

I think that the new arrangement should be treated as a restoration, although the King's powers will be more the power of influence rather than official powers in government, and people should be satisfied with it for now. We can have this official status for the Royal Family, with official duties, official titles, an official residence and official pay from the government, and treat the King as an officially-recognized king, but with zero official governmental powers. I'm fine with that; just consider it the 21st century version of monarchy. The Royal Family now has a platform to show Romania what it can do for it, with an official role. That's a good starting point.

 

[Cory]

I respect to much the Monarchy to see it mocked like this and I am sure this is why the Romanian royalists have this reaction this days.

 

[Duc_et_Pair]

I think it is quite an elegant solution. Give Princess Margarita a semi-official role. She will grace events with her attendance. Foreign heads of state can be received in audience. She will be on "the iron list" (President, Prime Minister, Chief Justice, Chair of Parliament, Governor of the National Bank, Commander of the armed forces and.... the Princess.) What else does one want? It is a deal they can not refuse.

 

[Cory]

If she wants to be the leader of a sort of NGO controlled by the republic that's her business. Her husband wanted at a certain stage to become even president of the republic so it is nothing surprising. The royalists will continue their campaign for Monarchy while the Romanians will ask why they have to pay so much for the republican authorities but are also asked to pay also the expenses of a "Royal House" when the country is not a Monarchy.


The "22" Magazine speaks about the anger of the royalists in the article "The Compromises of the Royal House. Its Last Actions Brought the Anger of the Authentic Monarchists":
Compromisurile Casei Regale.Ultimele sale actiuni au starnit furia monarhistilor autentici - Revista 22 - saptamanal independent de analiza politica si actualitate culturala

 

[CSENYC]

The "22" Magazine speaks about the anger of the royalists in the article "The Compromises of the Royal House. Its Last Actions Brought the Anger of the Authentic Monarchists":

Compromisurile Casei Regale.Ultimele sale actiuni au starnit furia monarhistilor autentici - Revista 22 - saptamanal independent de analiza politica si actualitate culturala

That article makes the "authentic monarchists" sound crazy. Claims that King Michael is controlled by the security services? OK...

The "authentic monarchists" need to get real. Only a minority of Romanians want a monarchy instead of a republic. Until the "authentic monarchists" or others change public opinion so that a majority of Romanians want a monarchy instead of a republic or elect a government that wants that, Romania will be a republic, period. Until then, having an official Royal House is a solution that opens a lot of doors and gives Romania more of a monarchy than most other countries have.

 

[Cory]

The authentic monarchist are very respected personalities in the country and they certainly feel betrayed by what's going on. For who is not Romanian it is not very easy to understand I presume. If Corneliu Coposu were still alive these things would not happen.

 

[CSENYC]

The "authentic monarchists" may feel betrayed, but until they persuade Romanians to elect a government that will change the Constitution to have a full restoration, nothing will change. They need to act to persuade a majority of Romanians to support restoration. Period.

If the "Leave" side in the UK was able to win a referendum to leave the EU, which is a shock to me and lots of people in the US, then the "authentic monarchists" in Romania can, with time and effort, win a referendum to restore the monarchy. Get to work, people.

 

[Cory]

The monarchists built a larger and larger consensus in the country arriving to convince 30% of the population. And they succeeded because also of the big popularity of the King.Now the monarchists must face the reality: people won't accept the Monarchy if there is not a clear Line of Princes to inherit the Throne.

 

[LadyRohan]

The monarchists did not build the concensus, the King did. If you cross-reference his popularity, his daughters popularity and the results from any polls regarding the monarchy, you will see that those who support the monarchy, have favorable and positive view of the King and the Royal House.
Would you like to see how those numbers would change if you proposed to reject the Royal Family completely, and make Romania a monarchy under a German prince?
Most people would laugh, frown or think that those suggesting this would be off their rockets, and go figure, they would be right.

I disagree with Duc_et_Pair in only one regard (which is a great, new experience for me), I do believe the monarchy can be restored. It is however, a very, very narrow process, that requires alot of correct choices, actions and so on, and I truly believe the current deal is a good start. It gives the Crown Princess a great platform to showcase the monarchy to a wider audience. It promotes family unity, as the organizatory things are settled and those members who have lost track might find themselves back in the fray (i.e Nicholas) and it gives much needed roles to people who are born into a regal family and found themselves back in a country where time has rolled on since their ousting.

The Royal Family cannot sit back in a palace or a villa somewhere and complain of days gone by and how they want their jobs back. They have to go out and actively engage in society, and find roles for themselves that make them both lead happy lives themselves, and be useful to their nation and the people they want to serve. That is exactly what are doing, more praise to them for it!

For every 'supporter' who say they're not behind them any more, one will find that they have been actively campaigning against them anyway, and for each of these people, I am convinced you will see a rise in the support of the Royal Family from their improved visibility, presence and tasks undertaken in Romanian society.

Princess Ragnhild of Norway said of her niece-in-law, the Crown Princess that she hoped she would never be Queen and that she would be dead if and when it happened. Well, the Princess is dead and the CP will be Queen (God willing) when her husband ascends, and Norwegians love her.
So much for sour grapes and bitterness not working out. I think you'll find the same being the case of a few grumpy royalists in Romania. In a few months the Crown Princess has done more for the cause of monarchy than they have achieved in 20 years.
I guess that's enough to make anyone bitter

Here's the only question that really matters: If and when the question is put to all Romanians, about keeping the republic or restoring the monarchy and the Royal Family, will you vote no because you don't like the Crown Princess or her husband? Will you vote no because she is a woman and under abolished salic law shouldn't be allowed to reign?

I would vote yes for the monarchy in Romania any day, based on the current Royal Family OR a foreign royal house, whatever was chosen to represent the land best, because it's an institution and a system far superior to its alternative.
Would you, Cory?

 

[CSENYC]

To me it seems strange for the Royal Family to be giving out awards, hosting dinners and otherwise doing things that royal families do when the Royal Family isn't now a royal family; it's a former King and his family.

Once the Royal Family gets its official status back, then it will be completely normal- and expected- for the Royal Family to engage in high-profile events. The Royal Family will have to work hard, doing good, to earn their pay. It's a good thing.

 

[Cory]

One thing the Romanians certainly do not like is to be asked for more money. If this Family wants more money from the republucan regime even if the country is officially a republic that won't make certainly this Family more popular.

 

[Duc_et_Pair]

That counts for many former royal families. The Bavarian monarchy was overturned almost 100 years ago. The former royal family of Bavaria still gets a sum of 14 million per year from the Wittelsbacher Ausgleichfonds. That foundation was established by the State of Bavaria "to alimentate the former royal family".

Almost all former royal families, the Hannovers, the Hessens, the Württembergers, the Lippes, the Waldeck-Pyrmonts, the Hohenzollerns, etc. have reached similar agreements with the republican governments of their former states. For many former royal families in the former DDR and East Prussia (Poland) the settlements with their governments went lost after WWII and the looting by the Communists. That is why after the fall of the Iron Curtain so many former royal families are proceeding for the return of stolen and looted properties, for the reimbursement as agreed with the former states, etc.

The State of Romania has made some agreements concerning former royal estates. Some of these are in use by the State or have a museal destination. A final settlement needs to be reached and with this the State of Romania shows they are as civilized and prudent as their "colleagues" in other countries where the monarchy has been abolished.

Link: Erben der bayerischen Könige kassieren noch Millionen - Bayern - Süddeutsche.de

 

[Cory]

A settlement for properties confiscated by the state is of course important. But here it is not really exactly this case. Here the republican regime wants the right to interfere with the Succession recognizing a "Headvof the Royal House" ignoring the traditional rules of the Royal House. The "Royal House" would become a sort of NGO controlled by the Parliament and the "Head of the Royal House" would have to submit a report every year. In order to prevent any restoration of Monarchy the "Head of the Royal House" would be subordinated to the republican authorities. This is the Montenegro "model" and not the German one. Here we do not speak about compensation for some goods because the Family has already regained the majority ofvthe goods. Here we speak about a deal to use Elisabeta Palace for free, to have the personal paid and to receive an allowance for activities of the"Royal House" in a country where Monarchy is not restored.

 

[CSENYC]

Cory, to your two posts:

1. Yes, the Royal Family will cost taxpayers money. But the Royal Family should show what a good value it is: it should do much more than the official head of state, at lower cost.

2. In every European monarchy, the Royal House is subordinated to the legislature, and succession is a matter of law passed by the legislature; the Royal House has to submit an annual report; etc. That's how things work in a democracy. So I see no problem with the Royal House being democratically accountable to the legislature. Yes, the legislature could take away the Royal House's funds if the Royal House gets too popular but the Romanian Royal Family is very wealthy and could survive without the government's pay if needed, if doing without that pay is required in order to for the Royal House to do what it wants to have a real restoration.

 

[Cory]

Cory, to your two posts:

1. Yes, the Royal Family will cost taxpayers money. But the Royal Family should show what a good value it is: it should do much more than the official head of state, at lower cost.

2. In every European monarchy, the Royal House is subordinated to the legislature, and succession is a matter of law passed by the legislature; the Royal House has to submit an annual report; etc. That's how things work in a democracy. So I see no problem with the Royal House being democratically accountable to the legislature. Yes, the legislature could take away the Royal House's funds if the Royal House gets too popular but the Romanian Royal Family is very wealthy and could survive without the government's pay if needed, if doing without that pay is required in order to for the Royal House to do what it wants to have a real restoration.

In 1990 a lot of people feared the daughters of the King would want money and that's why they returned and now they could claim they had a point.
You can't compare the Reigning Royal Families and their relationships with Governments/ Parliaments and a country that is a republic and the republican authorities control the descendants of the King in order to be sure Monarchy will never be restored.
What's going on now is in contradiction not only to the ideal of the restoration of Monarchy but also with the Constitution.

 

[CSENYC]

How do "republican authorities control the descendants of the King in order to be sure Monarchy will never be restored"?

The government gives the Royal Family money and can take away that money if the Royal Family agitates for a restoration. But we're not at that point yet; there is no near-term prospect of a restoration because the Romanian people do not want it. If the Romanian people decide that they want a restoration and the government takes away the Royal Family's funds, then the Royal Family can just pay for its own existence, just like I do for myself and billions of people around the world do. Further, if the Royal Family became popular and the government cut off its funding, then surely that would generate sympathy for the Royal Family and only help the prospects of a restoration.

How is "what's going on now...in contradiction...with the Constitution"? If the bill is unconstitutional, wouldn't a court stop the law?

And currently there is no near-term prospect of restoration. There is no long-term prospect of restoration, either, particularly as Margareta and Radu are the only members of the Royal Family who even bother living in Romania. Why focus on the harm that the new law could do when restoration isn't going to happen without the law, either?

 

[Cory]

The couple that you speak about are private citizens with no dynastic rights and enough properties to be able to carry on the events they organize.

 

[LadyRohan]

That is a view designed by you to reduce an actual Royal Family because you disagree with their place in the order of things.
A Royal Family has been defined in this thread before, they meet the criteria.
The Romanian government, President, politicians and those among the public who know about them, count the King and his family as the Royal Family, and the republican, democratically elected government is about to establish beyond any doubt where the dynastic rights in Romania lie through their acts of law, that the Royal House, and the Custodian, representing the King, have wisely and smartly negotiated and worked out.

To reduce the King and the Crown Princess, born to a blue-blooded King and a blue-blooded Princess is talk that really should be reserved to hardened republicans, who hate anything monarchist and would like to see the institution and all who represent it sent to the hinterlands as soon as possible.

Just because you disagree with the succession proposed by the King, the politicians clearly accept that times have changed since 1947, and that female heirs of a King is more acceptable than foreign princes who haven't held a title or position legally for a century. I never thought I'd have to say this in a monarchical thread on a monarchical forum, but thank God for politicians who manage to have a wider and more functional view than narrow-minded, self-declared 'supporters'.

 

[LadyRohan]

How do "republican authorities control the descendants of the King in order to be sure Monarchy will never be restored"?

The government gives the Royal Family money and can take away that money if the Royal Family agitates for a restoration. But we're not at that point yet; there is no near-term prospect of a restoration because the Romanian people do not want it. If the Romanian people decide that they want a restoration and the government takes away the Royal Family's funds, then the Royal Family can just pay for its own existence, just like I do for myself and billions of people around the world do. Further, if the Royal Family became popular and the government cut off its funding, then surely that would generate sympathy for the Royal Family and only help the prospects of a restoration.

How is "what's going on now...in contradiction...with the Constitution"? If the bill is unconstitutional, wouldn't a court stop the law?

And currently there is no near-term prospect of restoration. There is no long-term prospect of restoration, either, particularly as Margareta and Radu are the only members of the Royal Family who even bother living in Romania. Why focus on the harm that the new law could do when restoration isn't going to happen without the law, either?

The politicians act in a very, very supportive way of the Royal Family, and they get scolded for it.
The politicians ignore the Royal Family and they get scolded for it.

Talk about burning your light in both ends.

Cory is referring to the defunct constitution of 1923, that will never be restored and that he is reading as literal as some read the Holy Book. The trouble and the marked difference from the latter, is that a defunct constitution is universally accepted as having gone when it's abolished. No constitution has ever been restored, replacing a new one, without significant changes, because it would be out of place and out of date in many areas.
Denying female succession would be one of the areas.

CSENYC is correct, restoration isn't on the current agenda (although more royals than the Crown Princessly couple live in Romania, like Princess Maria), but the most important thing right now, is to ensure progress for the family and the institution they represent, while at the same time making sure that what they do and agree to, does not in any way hinder the ideals and goals of the Royal Family, the ultimate one being restoring the monarchy.

The Royal Family made clear last year they're in Romania to serve, in whatever way people want them to. That's code for, 'we're ready for the monarchy to be restored, at your request'. If they want to earn that trust and privilege, this arrangement being offered, is a very, very, very good start.

 

[Cory]

How do "republican authorities control the descendants of the King in order to be sure Monarchy will never be restored"?

The government gives the Royal Family money and can take away that money if the Royal Family agitates for a restoration. But we're not at that point yet; there is no near-term prospect of a restoration because the Romanian people do not want it. If the Romanian people decide that they want a restoration and the government takes away the Royal Family's funds, then the Royal Family can just pay for its own existence, just like I do for myself and billions of people around the world do. Further, if the Royal Family became popular and the government cut off its funding, then surely that would generate sympathy for the Royal Family and only help the prospects of a restoration.

How is "what's going on now...in contradiction...with the Constitution"? If the bill is unconstitutional, wouldn't a court stop the law?

And currently there is no near-term prospect of restoration. There is no long-term prospect of restoration, either, particularly as Margareta and Radu are the only members of the Royal Family who even bother living in Romania. Why focus on the harm that the new law could do when restoration isn't going to happen without the law, either?

The new project of law at section 5 article 2 says the this law does not bring to any change of the Constitution regarding the form of government. I seriously doubt the couple that leads now the King's Family has ever believed in the restoration of Monarchy in the country but now they agree to go against the 30% of the population that asks for the return of Monarchy and the changes in the Constitution to make this possibility happen.This detail of the new project of law shows that the ultimate goal for this Family is not the restoration of Monarchy but the preserve of a republican status quo in change of an official role in the republic with extra finances and the palace to be used. All that the King and the royalists built for 26 years is now put aside. No wonder of the reaction of many people not only monarchists. Before commenting about this please read the new project of law section 5 article 2:

http://www.sgg.ro/legislativ/docs/2016/06/6p_q01rng9tbm8vdz2jk.pdf

 

[LadyRohan]

You make an assumption that Princess Margareta does not want to restore the monarchy, despite her saying the opposite as late as in several interviews before Christmas last year.
Do you base that on any facts, or do you claim to know she lies based on clairvoyance?
You say the Crown Princess and Prince Radu go against everyone who support the monarchy by making a formalized agreement on representing more, receiving, travelling and doing more for Romania in return for housing, infrastructure and allocated funds. In what way does that differ from what a Royal Family does? In what way does it differ from Montenegro and Serbia?

 

[Cory]

Cory, based on your posts, it sounds like the Royal Family doesn't care about restoration. I doubt that, but if it's true, then in order to have a restoration, Romania will need a different Royal Family. It also sounds like the royalists who want a restoration want nothing to do with this new official status for the Royal Family.

If that's the case, then there is zero chance of a monarchy being restored: a Royal Family that doesn't push for it, a need for a brand-new royal family and royalists who don't really want what the Royal Family is accepting. What you have is a complete mess, if the goal is restoration.

I think that the new arrangement should be treated as a restoration, although the King's powers will be more the power of influence rather than official powers in government, and people should be satisfied with it for now. We can have this official status for the Royal Family, with official duties, official titles, an official residence and official pay from the government, and treat the King as an officially-recognized king, but with zero official governmental powers. I'm fine with that; just consider it the 21st century version of monarchy. The Royal Family now has a platform to show Romania what it can do for it, with an official role. That's a good starting point.

I agree that in order to have a restoration of Monarchy there is the need for a Prince outside the King's Family (but from the Hohenzollern House) to be supported by the monarchists.
The new "arrangement" is not a restoration of Monarchy at all but a strenghtening of the republic.

 

[CSENYC]

While I'm not Romanian, I would think that there is almost zero chance that Romanians would vote for a Hohenzollern (and thus German-speaking) prince to become their monarch. Just why would they?

Does the law prohibit the Royal Family from advocating for a restoration? If so, isn't that an unconstitutional prohibition on freedom of conscience (under EU law or Romanian law)? Or does the law just say that the Constitution isn't changed by the law (which would allow future changes)?

Either way, this new law is the best alternative for now.

 

[Cory]

This project of law is probably quite anticonstotutional but that must be decided by the Constitutional Court at the right moment. The law strenghten the republican regime.
The King's descendants are not seen as Romanians by many Romanians. So...