: I'm guessing now, but I think that it is a
: sensitive issue to appoint a non-royal
: Regent. The government doesn't do that if it
: isn't necessary. Why open that can of worms,
: if there are no urgent business for the Head
: of State to take care of?
Then the Swedish situation is somehow similar to the Danish. But it is written in the Danish Regency Law from the 1870's, that when there is no regent appointed, the Council of State (= Government) asumes the duties. It has never been tested - the RF avoids being abroad all of them at the same time - unless for special occations and for a very short period of time. Should this period extend - then I guess the COS-regency would materilise.
: Is this why the royals have to inform the
: Prime Minister when they travel abroad, so
: someone somewhere knows who is the automatic
: regent? Or that noone holds that role.
: And you think so based on...?
: I don't think. I ask. I might have to remind
: you that this is one of the purposes whith
: this formum.
: You stated it as a fact that royals must
: inform the PM if they go abroad, and they
: don't. The King informs the PM if he goes
: abroad. The Crown Princess mustn't go abroad
: without the King's approval. There are no
: such rules for other Royals.
I undertand that the king is the only one who has to inform the government when he goes abroad. But in practice, whould'nt someone would inform the government when all those eligible to be regents are abroad? If I was PM I would like to know if my country was without a functioning Head of State.
Message Thread | This response ↓
« Back to index