the House of The King warned the Government of UCD in 1978 that the article of the Constitution, which gave preference to the male over the female in the succession of the Crown ought not to be altered. A parliamentary UCD introduced an amendment to modify it, but ended up by pulling in to the pressure of his parliamentary group. The House of the King had warned that changes to that article at that time carried with it a mess dynastic due to the fact that both don Juan de Borbón and don Juan Carlos had older sisters.
MORE INFORMATION
The day Congress voted and rejected the Republic, PARTICULARLY The Constitution, a journey in 169 articles, The four major parties to support notable reforms of the Constitution
The seven fathers of the Constitution worked during the summer and the autumn of 1977, the text of the constitution without pressure from the House of the King. Agreed on a text that he was leaving the King Juan Carlos without political power and had no indications against the institution concerned. The intervention came when we raised amendments to the chapter of succession, which questioned one of the items understand that it was discriminatory towards women.
it was Not, in any way, a pressing issue at that time. The only mp who was part of the Constitutional Committee, and Maria Teresa Revilla, UCD, ensures that objected. “For me, it was inconceivable that if in the article 14 says that all spaniards are equal without distinction, then prefer the man to the succession of the Crown. That was an inconsistency and an inconsistency. I prepared an amendment and presented it,” says Revilla to THE COUNTRY. In the end, he ended up withdrawing the amendment because of the pressures of his group, as he confesses.
Miguel Herrero and Rodríguez de Mignon remembers the incident, but it removes value: “raised only a deputy, but then I came to illegal bahis nowhere”. A member of parliament from UCD who played a key role in the processing of the constitutional text, explains what happened: “We had no direct access to King Juan Carlos because that belonged to president Suárez. And what is certain is that the King remained formally on the sidelines. The only indication that, at least I, got from the Zarzuela was on account of the prevalence of the male in the succession. I called Sabino [Fernández Campo, chief of the King’s House] and told me that, if eliminábamos the prevalence of the male, we were going to introduce a schism tremendous in the royal family, because both don Juan and don Juan Carlos had older sisters.”
The socialist Enrique Múgica Herzog participated in the debates of the Constitutional and now considered as article of the succession of the Crown is a clear discrimination between both sexes. If the PSOE were not opposed, he said, was not to hinder the legitimation of the Monarchy in the Constitution: “After the death of Franco, we accept and assume the crown. You must take into account that to defend the Constitution in its integrity, but we also had to defend the king as Head of State. In addition, the attitude of don Juan Carlos was very important in the restoration of democracy”.
The only amendments that were submitted to the article which regulated the succession of the Crown the defended Heribert Barrera, of CKD. Not even dared to amend the paragraph referred to the preference of the male over the woman because he believed that it would make other groups with more possibilities of victory. The plenary approved this article of the Constitution on July 12, 1978 by 132 votes in favour, 15 noes, and 123 abstaining.
the House of The King has not wished to make comments regarding this episode. Only refers to statements that Philip VI was to the doors of the clinic when his first born daughter, princess Leonor, and asked him if he had been born a queen: “No, No, not now, has born a princess. But the logic of the times indicates that if the reform that is planned and proposed to the Government, and must assess and decide the Cortes Generales, capturing the majority feeling of the spaniards, so be it. In any case, the Courts will need to assess the opportunity to temporal and political moment that, without a doubt, it will require the greatest possible consensus”.
Thirteen years later, the reform still has not occurred despite the fact that all parties are in agreement.
