it Is in conflict with the constitution, when prince Joachim takes his apanage button 300.000 kroner pr. month – with him abroad, when he from summer begins a military training in Paris?
No, believe the prime minister’s office – despite the fact that it is black on white, that ‘Årpengene may not, without the Parliamentary consent be enjoyed outside of the kingdom.’ It wrote to See and Hear in the previous week.
– There is a practice that the royal family can also receive årpenge, without that it has been in the Parliament, when there is talk about training abroad, of a temporary character, came the answer from the prime minister’s office, which referred to, that the same had been done in connection with crown prince Frederik’s support of education in the UNITED states in 1992 to 1993.
Such is the wording in the constitution
For members of the royal house can be årpenge by law. Årpengene may not, without the parliamentary consent be enjoyed outside the kingdom.
the basic law, chapter 2, section 11.
The reply puzzled to the degree that the Unity Søren Søndergaard, who is therefore asked three questions to the Parliamentary legal affairs Committee about why the constitution is apparently not being complied with.
Now there came a reply in the case.
“Will the minister – in extension of the section 11, from which it appears that “årpengene may not, without the Parliamentary consent be enjoyed outside the kingdom” – state whether the minister has been in, or are planning to take the contact to the Danish Parliament, in the occasion of prince Joachim of denmark, in the summer move to Paris with his family to start a full-time course at the École Militaire?”
“Will the minister – in extension of the section 11, from which it appears that “årpengene may not, without the Parliamentary consent be enjoyed outside the kingdom” – state whether the then prime minister took contact to the Danish Parliament, as the crown prince Frederik of denmark in 1992 and moved to the U.S. to read political science or whether there never has been contact to the Danish Parliament on a årpengemodtagers long-term stays abroad?”
“Will the minister – in extension of the section 11, from which it appears that “årpengene may not, without the Parliamentary consent be enjoyed outside the kingdom” – transmit the interpretations of this grundlovssætning, as the minister relying on?”
It follows from section 11, 2. pkt., to årpenge not without Parliamentary consent can be taken outside the kingdom.
Grundlovskomitéens report does not contain a detailed description of when the stay outside the realm requires Parliamentary consent, but the following udtaltes of the C. G. Enough in the context of the negotiations on the report on the Rhine, cf. report on the Negotiations in the Reichstag 1848-1849, sp. 1635:
“Hardly, I need also to highlight, with Respect to § 16 [the present § 11], that the purpose never has been, a Member of the royal House should not be able to leave the Kingdom something Instant without Parliamentary Consent, but only that the Appanagerne not without Parliamentary Consent could be enjoyed outside the Kingdom. There is a games room open for a smooth sound and reasonable View of the Circumstances, surely No one can disapprove.”
the Royal family has announced that H. K. H. Prince Joachim together with his family moving to Paris from september 2019 until the summer of 2020 in order to participate in a military training. There is, therefore, a training course in abroad is of a temporary nature. Such a stay involves for the prime minister’s office assessment is not that the government according to the basic law, § 11, 2. pkt., must grant consent to the prince receives årpenge in the said period.
It should be noted, that the government not be seen to have notified the consent to the H. K. H. crown Prince Frederik received årpenge in the period 1992-93, where he read political science in the UNITED states.
read more Close
Here regard the Danish prime minister, Lars Løkke Rasmussen to a report from 1848, where it appears that the meaning of the law ‘by no means has been, a Member of the royal House should not be able to leave the Kingdom some Instant’.
And it does not Søndergaard less confused.
– As the layman would I interpret a moment as a short period of time, and not moving with the whole family in a year, he explains to Extra Bladet.
He notes also that the 49-year-old Joachim has not denied, that the stay in Paris can last more than a year.
– If in the first place, a year away from the uk without being able to fit duties does not, that the government must give permission to, that you still can get apanage, then when? Is it two years? Five years? 50 years?
the Royal family’s communications department has previously stated that Joachim and Marie will continue their work in the extent that it is possible, but that they, after all, moving to another country.
Søren Søndergaard has not been much wiser of Lars Løkke Rasmussen’s answers. Photo: Jens Dresling
Paul stresses that he does not have anything outstanding with Joachim as such, but just wondering about the system, where the rules apparently being bent, without Parliament being informed.
– Will you go on with the case?
– It is clear that at some point I would like to have defined, when a moment stops to be a moment. I don’t care in relation to the royal family, but I don’t care about that there are some areas where things are just running without that there is order on it. It is, after all, the Danish parliament’s task to ensure that the country’s laws including the constitution are complied with, he strikes fast.
Experts: A question of interpretation
Juraforskere tells the dissent, that § 11 of the constitution must ensure that the royal did not move permanently away from Denmark with årpenge.
– the Purpose of the law is that you don’t want someone living in another country and get årpenge, says Joergen Albaek Jensen, a professor specializing in constitutional law at Aarhus University.
According to Frederick Waage, who is an associate professor of constitutional law at the University of Southern denmark is the question of lovstridigheder in the matter so a discussion of whether you believe that prince Joachim move permanently or temporarily to France.
– It, you can discuss in relation to the constitution, is whether prince Joachim is permanently relocated by the kingdom of Denmark during his training, he says.
Professor in legal history Ditlev Tamm University of Copenhagen, adds:
– You need to look at what the background of the rule has been.
– When, for example, there stands in the basic law states that secrecy of correspondence is protected, we also say today, that it applies to mail, because it is about protecting privacy, he says.
Danish royal – 13. feb. 2019 – at. 19:22, Joachim circumventing the law
One access as Ekstra Bladet has been in the communication between the royal family and the prime minister’s office reveals that the royal family has approached about the move, before the magazine See and Hear took contact to the royal family in the beginning of February.
First there contacts office of the prime minister to the crown with a mail, where they write a draft response to the magazine.
‘That is the practice that the royal takes årpengene abroad, when there is talk about the stay of temporary nature in the context of education. The same was H. K. H. crown prince Frederik, when he in 1992-1993 studied political science in the UNITED states.’
But in the email it appears also, that the question about apanage abroad nor at the apartment were resolved.
In a parenthesis informs the prime minister’s office namely, the following:
‘It is apparent from the royal family’s website, that KP (the crown prince, red.) studied political science at Harvard in 1992-93. He has scored årpenge, since he reached the age of 18 years in 1986. By a quick search of the F2 archive are seen that are not to be taken into the question in 1992-93 ift. the crown prince.’
