He has turned the whole royal family into a vaudeville.
Some of the decisions the King has made, can sometimes rightly be questioned, but there are several factors one often times tend to overlook, such as the lack of internal knowledge of processes, family 'rules' and guidelines for behaviour etc. It might be the case, that when it comes to f.ex children and grandchildren, the King has firm and clear rules that when broken, results in some form of consequence, like loss of royal title. From the example of Princess Sophie, who was demoted and later restored, it seems clear that members of the Royal Family can overcome issues that occur and be rehabilitated in the eyes of the King.
In democratic monarchies, decisions, even though formally and finally being made by the sovereign with regards to things like titles, are most often made in close consultation with the Prime Minister, relevant minister or cabinet. The problem that happens in defunct monarchies, with active and/or former Royal Families, is the decision-making process. Who decides the rules of succession for a Royal Family in a republic? Who makes the calls on titles, positions and responsibilities?
From the practical examples we have, the Romanian one in particular, it seems both clear and respected by media and the public, that the King has the authority to make such calls. The Crown Princess is called 'Principesa Mostenitoare' (Crown Princess) in almost every arena, although the last constitution does not recognize that. Nicholas Medforth-Mills was elevated to Prince of Romania, and was always referred to as such, when the King had made his call. That is evidence in itself of how Romania sees and treats its Royal Family, and respects the King, and his calls, sometimes derided on these forums for being unlawful etc.
The trouble is, you can't break a law that is gone. Like I've asked many times, who makes sure that the guidelines and rules that exist in a monarchy are up to date, relevant and functional when the monarchy is abolished? The answer has to be the representative(s) of the monarchy has to make that call, and where there is a former sovereign alive, it would seem that authority has to lie with him to make such calls. One can always question the wisdom of calls made, but to question their validity in itself, creates a catch 22 situation that those who oppose the sovereign, will always thrive on.
Look to Romania and the line of succession debate in here. Some are clearly disputing the Kings ability to make changes to the line of succession, and dismiss them as unlawful, against precedence and tradition. At the same time, the same people ridicule when the King abides by the new line of succession, alters titles and orders of precedence. Why would it be relevant that a King makes changes, if you to begin with dismissing his ability to decide them at all?
I ask the question again, quite sure that it will once more go unanswered: If Romania had continued as a monarchy, uninterrupted by the overthrow in 1947, the King and Queen would have raised 5 daughters and had no sons, would Romania had chosen to change their constitution, like every other monarchy faced with only female direct-line successors, or would they had looked abroad for a different solution?
When we talk about a line of succession that is to have any relevance in modern Romania, I think it would be a good idea to have a shared starting point. If the goal is to find a line that would work with the prospect of restoring the monarchy, overlooking the Royal Family completely seems illogical and would ignore any visible royal presence in Romania. If it comes to securing the inheritance of property and possessions after the Kings demise someday, it is important to note that this is not relevant for the line of succession, as the Kings possession will go to his children regardless.
So what is the contention in the end? A line of succession in Romania must have legitimacy with the people, if it is to have any function, other than to be relegated to the scrapheap of history. In the case of Romania, where there actually is a debate about the monarchy, where there is a visible royal presence, and where, in particular, the Crown Princess and Prince Radu keep working to promote the cause of monarchy and represent the family, it seems an intellectual exercise rooted in very little practical realism to try to conjure up a new King or Queen at some point, that are not based on King Mihais family.
