|
|
|
|
| |
| |
yanbee2@yahoo.com (Yannis) wrote in message news:<a75bea69.0311260702.17a245a1@posting.google.com>...
jsaepuru@solo.ee (Jaak Suurpere) wrote in message news:<e8319284.0311250135.35bafa48@posting.google.com>...
Greek law applicable in 1947: This could be summarised as follows:
Greek citizenship is acquired through birth. If the father was a Greek
citizen (since 1984: the mother also) then the son/daughter is also a
Greek citizen, irrespective of place of birth, residence in Greece
or,indeed,choice. In other words one may be a Greek citizen without
even wishing to or, indeed, without even being aware of his (or her)
Greek citizenship. Prince Philip's father (Prince Andrew of Greece, a
son of King George I of the Hellenes) was a Greek citizen, therefore
Prince Philip had Greek citizenship in 1947.
No. According to Greek citizenship laws (as of 1947) the mere fact
that one acquired foreign citizenship did not lose to loss of Greek
citizenship (double citizenship allowed). In fact even renouncing
Greek citizenship was (and is) not easy! Very restrictive conditions
apply, and in any case there is no indication that Philip ever tried
to renounce his Greek citizenship (as oppposed to his rights to the
Greek throne).
Even if Philip lost his rights to succeed to the Greek throne (in
itself this is questionable) that would not affect his citizenship.
There is an opinion from no less than the then Attorney General of
Greece, dating from 1962, on the occasion of Sofia's marriage to Juan
Carlos. Sofia did lose her rights to the Greek throne with that
marriage, but the Attorney General very properly pointed out that
there ever was nothing in the Greek laws of citizenship and/or the
royal household law to indicate that anyone losing rights to the
throne also lost citizenship and therefore general principles applied
and Sophia retained her Greek citizenship. The same reasoning is
applicable to Philip, there having been no significant change in the
law from 1947 (or 1941) to 1962.
So, at least in theory, Philip, Prince Charles, Princes William and
Harry etc. etc. are all Greek citizens. In fact, even Diana was one
since at the time of her marriage to Charles (1981) the law was that a
woman marrying a Greek citizen automatically aquired Greek
citizenship. This was changed in 1984 but not retrospectively.
Unless posters specifically want me to I won't go into the imbroglio
with the ex-royal's family citizenship and the law of 1994 stripping
them of it. This law could or could not (based on interpretation) also
affect Philip, Charles and the rest of this happy Greek family !
I'd specifically want to.
Where are the Greek royals citizens now?
Finally, if you will allow me one little remark: The original poster
asked a simple question on Greek law of citizenship. Until I came
along all the answers he got were nothing to do with the question he
asked (hardly surprising since it requires specialised technical
knowledge) but instead pointed out that the term he used (Prince
Philip of Mountbatten) was not correct. True, but we all know whom he
meant and, I don't know about you, but I do find that a little
annoying. You read a subject line and you look at the thread and
expect to find messages relevant to that subject line and what you
find instead is messages pointing out a rather obvious mistake. I
don't know about you, but I do find that a little annoying. Do please
forgive me, I don't wish to flame anyone or start a fight.
Yannis
Let us count the consequences:
Since Philip remained a Greek citizen in 1947 (making no attempt to
renounce the citizenship in the due manner), Elizabeth was a Greek
citizen with all that follows.
Or not?
Greek royal family law allegedly purported to make marriages by royal
family members without due royal consent null and void.
Regardless of whether this may have changed after 1967, if that was
the case in 1947, then Philip has never been married (in Greek law)
and all his children are bastards, with all that follows. (For
example, a second bigamous marriage will not become valid on the death
of the first spouse.)
If Philip married Elizabeth, then Charles, Andrew and Edward were all
Greek citizens at least until 1994. So was Anne.
If Philip was unmarried, his mistress would not have been a Greek.
What was the Greek law on bastardy 1948 to 1964?
I understand that as of 1962, a Greek woman lawfully married to a
foreign man remained a Greek citizen, but her children would not be
Greeks if born before 1984. A foreign woman authomatically became a
Greek on lawful marriage.
What was the status of bastards born of a Greek mother and foreign or
unknown father? What was the status of bastards born of a Greek father
and a foreign mother (like the UK royals)?
If Charles, Andrew and Edward were Greeks, do they owe military
service?
Both children of Anne were born before 1984, so presumably they were
not Greeks.
Diana was a Greek if Charles was one... and that makes William and
Harry equally Greek - and, unless deprived of citizenship in 1994, do
they owe military service?
And something to check:
If the father was a Greek citizen (since 1984: the mother also)
Well, what's the status of Beatrice Elizabeth Mary, Eugenie Victoria
Helena and Louise Alice Elizabeth Mary?
Sarah and Sophie have not been Greeks even if Andrew and Edward was
because they married after 1984.
What's the status of children born to a Greek father and his foreign
wife after 1984?
|
| |
| |
Subject: Re: Citizenship of Prince Philip of Mountbatten
From: jsaepuru@solo.ee (Jaak Suurpere)
Date: 11/26/2003 10:39 AM Pacific Standard Time
So, at least in theory, Philip, Prince Charles, Princes William and
Harry etc. etc. are all Greek citizens. In fact, even Diana was one
since at the time of her marriage to Charles (1981) the law was that a
woman marrying a Greek citizen automatically aquired Greek
citizenship. This was changed in 1984 but not retrospectively.
Unless posters specifically want me to I won't go into the imbroglio
with the ex-royal's family citizenship and the law of 1994 stripping
them of it. This law could or could not (based on interpretation) also
affect Philip, Charles and the rest of this happy Greek family !
I'd specifically want to.
Where are the Greek royals citizens now?
Let us count the consequences:
Since Philip remained a Greek citizen in 1947 (making no attempt to
renounce the citizenship in the due manner), Elizabeth was a Greek
citizen with all that follows.
Or not?
Elizabeth became Queen of England on the death of her father. It doesn't
matter whom she married prior to that. Am English sovereign cannot be a
citizen of any country--probably not even of England.
The sovereign has a special status. Citizens, for example, pay taxes. Until
recently, the Queen paid none--until she volunteered to do so.
Greek royal family law allegedly purported to make marriages by royal
family members without due royal consent null and void.
By the time Philip got married, his father was out of Greece since 1922 and
perhaps even dead. Philip's father was not king of Greece. Philip's mother,
the sister of Lord Louis Mountbatten, was a granddaughter of
Queen Victoria of England. This thread is silly. Philip became a British
citizen in 1947. Greek law applies to him not at all.
Regardless of whether this may have changed after 1967, if that was
the case in 1947, then Philip has never been married (in Greek law)
and all his children are bastards, with all that follows.
Nonsense. As if Greek law applied to them in some way--or even the laws of the
Greek Orthodox Church! The children of Philip are English--pure and simple.
They do not live in Greece. I was not born in the US, either, but, as an
American citizen, I couldn't care less about the laws of the country of my
origin. They apply to me not at all.
(For
example, a second bigamous marriage will not become valid on the death
of the first spouse.)
What is the point of all this? Even assuming the Greek law was cited correctly
here, how does it apply to Philip unless he went to Greece to live? Which is
doubtful he ever would.
If Philip married Elizabeth, then Charles, Andrew and Edward were all
Greek citizens at least until 1994. So was Anne.
Nonsense. They were born in England.
If Philip was unmarried, his mistress would not have been a Greek.
What was the Greek law on bastardy 1948 to 1964?
Oh, for Pity's Sake!
I understand that as of 1962, a Greek woman lawfully married to a
foreign man remained a Greek citizen, but her children would not be
Greeks if born before 1984. A foreign woman authomatically became a
Greek on lawful marriage.
A queen is not just "a foreign woman". Everyone in the House of Windsor
married foreigners until the sometime in the 20th Century.
What was the status of bastards born of a Greek mother and foreign or
unknown father? What was the status of bastards born of a Greek father
and a foreign mother (like the UK royals)?
Even if they are all considered "bastards" by Greek law--again, such laws apply
to them not at all. They live in England.
If Charles, Andrew and Edward were Greeks, do they owe military
service?
No. They owe nothing to Greece in any way whatsoever.
Both children of Anne were born before 1984, so presumably they were
not Greeks.
Presumably? Most certainly not. BTW, I doubt Prince Philip has even a drop of
Greek blood in him.
Diana was a Greek if Charles was one... and that makes William and
Harry equally Greek - and, unless deprived of citizenship in 1994, do
they owe military service?
They are not Greeks.
(snip of more nonsense)
"THE EXODUS CHRONICLES: Beliefs, Legends & Rumors from Antiquity Regarding the
Exodus of the Jews from Egypt" by Marianne Luban
You'll never think about the Biblical Book of Exodus in the same way again!
http://www.geocities.com/scribelist/Exodus2.html
|
| |
| |
jsaepuru@solo.ee (Jaak Suurpere) wrote in message > > Unless posters specifically want me to I won't go into the imbroglio
with the ex-royal's family citizenship and the law of 1994 stripping
them of it. This law could or could not (based on interpretation) also
affect Philip, Charles and the rest of this happy Greek family !
I'd specifically want to.
I shall a post a separate thread on that when I have time.
Where are the Greek royals citizens now?
Most of the time, in London but they've been in and out of Greece
several times this year.
Let us count the consequences:
Since Philip remained a Greek citizen in 1947 (making no attempt to
renounce the citizenship in the due manner), Elizabeth was a Greek
citizen with all that follows.
Or not?
It all depends on the validity of their marriage. This raises two
issues a) religion, since they were married by Anglican rites. Under
Greek law this is recognised only provided Philip , too was Anglican
at the time. I don't think there would be any difficulty in proving
that, indeed, he had converted by then. b) the Greek royal house law.
It depends on whether Philip's marriage was "approved" by King George
II or not. I have not seen anything approving it, but then again maybe
there was something. One would have to look in the 1947 Greek
Government Gazette but it is not on-line and I don't have access to it
nor the time (alas!) to hunt for little items like that.
If Philip married Elizabeth, then Charles, Andrew and Edward were all
Greek citizens at least until 1994. So was Anne.
Correct.
If Philip was unmarried, his mistress would not have been a Greek.
What was the Greek law on bastardy 1948 to 1964?
Exactly what do you mean by "law on bastardy"? The problem is not
bastardy per se, it's the so called presumption of paternity or
whatever. In most countries,Greece being one of them, children born in
wedlock are presumed to have the husband as father. Therefore since
they are his children they get his citizenship. But without any
marriage there is no such presumption. One can of course "recognise"
(I'm not sure that's the correct legal term - legitimise perhaps?
Anyway, I mean a declaration accepting paternity) his child born out
of wedlock,thereby also passing on his citizenship, but Philip
certainly did not do that, at least not in the proper form. Or maybe
he did, maybe under English law the fact that he appears as the
children's father on their birth certificate is enough. Under Greek
law this is not the proper form of "recognising" paternity but perhaps
English law should cover that. This is getting more and more
complicated, now you know why lawyers charge so much!
What was the status of bastards born of a Greek mother and foreign or
unknown father? What was the status of bastards born of a Greek father
and a foreign mother (like the UK royals)?
The answer to your question is given above. IF you have a Greek father
(i.e. if paternity has been lawfully established) then the fact that
he is not married to the mother is not important. If there is no
father in the eyes of the law,then a Greek mother could, even under
the old rules, pass citizenship.
If Charles, Andrew and Edward were Greeks, do they owe military
service?
No, they're exempt as long as they don't enter Greece and continuously
reside there for 6 months. This is the reason why none of
Constantine's children has ever had to do military service in the
Greek army, even when their citizenship was not in qustion.
Diana was a Greek if Charles was one... and that makes William and
Harry equally Greek - and, unless deprived of citizenship in 1994, do
they owe military service?
No, same reason as above.
What's the status of children born to a Greek father and his foreign
wife after 1984?
They're Greek citizens, and the reverse (Greek wife, foreign father)
also applies.
Yannis
|
| |
| |
marianneluban@aol.comnospam (MarianneLuban) wrote in message news:<20031126170429.27776.00001057@mb-m06.aol.com>...
Subject: Re: Citizenship of Prince Philip of Mountbatten
From: jsaepuru@solo.ee (Jaak Suurpere)
Date: 11/26/2003 10:39 AM Pacific Standard Time
So, at least in theory, Philip, Prince Charles, Princes William and
Harry etc. etc. are all Greek citizens. In fact, even Diana was one
since at the time of her marriage to Charles (1981) the law was that a
woman marrying a Greek citizen automatically aquired Greek
citizenship. This was changed in 1984 but not retrospectively.
Unless posters specifically want me to I won't go into the imbroglio
with the ex-royal's family citizenship and the law of 1994 stripping
them of it. This law could or could not (based on interpretation) also
affect Philip, Charles and the rest of this happy Greek family !
Elizabeth became Queen of England on the death of her father. It doesn't
matter whom she married prior to that. Am English sovereign cannot be a
citizen of any country--probably not even of England.
Does it follow that e. g. a Monegasque or Thai sovereign cannot be a
citizen of any country, including, say, USA - that an US citizen who
becomes a sovereign of any country ceases to be a US citizen without
any action on his or her part?
The sovereign has a special status. Citizens, for example, pay taxes. Until
recently, the Queen paid none--until she volunteered to do so.
By the time Philip got married, his father was out of Greece since 1922 and
perhaps even dead. Philip's father was not king of Greece. Philip's mother,
the sister of Lord Louis Mountbatten, was a granddaughter of
Queen Victoria of England. This thread is silly. Philip became a British
citizen in 1947. Greek law applies to him not at all.
Philip did not cease being a Greek citizen.
Regardless of whether this may have changed after 1967, if that was
the case in 1947, then Philip has never been married (in Greek law)
and all his children are bastards, with all that follows.
Nonsense. As if Greek law applied to them in some way--or even the laws of
the Greek Orthodox Church! The children of Philip are English--pure and
simple. They do not live in Greece. I was not born in the US, either, but, as > an American citizen, I couldn't care less about the laws of the country of my
origin. They apply to me not at all.
Do American laws apply to people born in US who go to live abroad?
(For example, a second bigamous marriage will not become valid on the death
of the first spouse.)
What is the point of all this? Even assuming the Greek law was cited
correctly here, how does it apply to Philip unless he went to Greece to live? > Which is doubtful he ever would.
Nonsense. They were born in England.
So what?
Children of US citizens happen to be US citizens even if born in
England.
If Philip was unmarried, his mistress would not have been a Greek.
What was the Greek law on bastardy 1948 to 1964?
Oh, for Pity's Sake!
A queen is not just "a foreign woman". Everyone in the House of Windsor
married foreigners until the sometime in the 20th Century.
Does Greek law of citizenship make exceptions on foreign queens?
Yes, the Windsors married foreigners. However, most of the foreign
countries concerned agreed with England that a married woman
authomatically lost her maiden citizenship. Philip, by contrast, was a
man.
What does the US law say about the citizenship of Grace Kelly?
What was the status of bastards born of a Greek mother and foreign or
unknown father? What was the status of bastards born of a Greek father
and a foreign mother (like the UK royals)?
Even if they are all considered "bastards" by Greek law--again, such laws apply
to them not at all. They live in England.
No. They owe nothing to Greece in any way whatsoever.
Presumably? Most certainly not. BTW, I doubt Prince Philip has even a drop of
Greek blood in him.
They are not Greeks.
(snip of more nonsense)
"THE EXODUS CHRONICLES: Beliefs, Legends & Rumors from Antiquity Regarding the
Exodus of the Jews from Egypt" by Marianne Luban
You'll never think about the Biblical Book of Exodus in the same way again!
http://www.geocities.com/scribelist/Exodus2.html
|
| |
| |
Subject: Re: Citizenship of Prince Philip of Mountbatten
From: jsaepuru@solo.ee (Jaak Suurpere)
Date: 11/27/2003 10:48 AM Pacific Standard Time
Message-id: <e8319284.0311271048.24270acb@posting.google.com>
Subject: Re: Citizenship of Prince Philip of Mountbatten
From: jsaepuru@solo.ee (Jaak Suurpere)
Date: 11/26/2003 10:39 AM Pacific Standard Time
Does it follow that e. g. a Monegasque or Thai sovereign cannot be a
citizen of any country, including, say, USA - that an US citizen who
becomes a sovereign of any country ceases to be a US citizen without
any action on his or her part?
What difference does it make? You can have dual citizenship, but the laws of
where you live are what matters. For a discussion, see
http://www.richw.org/dualcit/
The sovereign has a special status. Citizens, for example, pay taxes.
Until
mother,
Philip did not cease being a Greek citizen.
That may be the way Greek law looks at it; I cannot say. Regardless, he
doesn't live in Greece. He owes nothing to Greece. If he. for some reason,
went to live in Greece, then that would be another story. While Philip lives
in England, Greece has no authority over him. This is humorous. Let us say
Philip went to visit Greece. You think the people there would look upon him as
a Greek with his non-Greek ancestry and scarcely having ever lived in Greece at
all? He is the husband of the Queen of England--an Englishman who might still
remember how to say a few words in Greek.
about the laws of the country
of my
Do American laws apply to people born in US >who go to live abroad?
Yes. Unless they change their citizenship.
Then they would no longer have to pay taxes in the US.
(For example, a second bigamous marriage will not become valid on the
death
of the first spouse.)
live? > Which is doubtful he ever would.
So what?
What do you mean "so what"? They consider themselves English. Are you saying
citizenship is not a matter of choice--but depends upon where ones parents
where born? Some countries may have weird laws with regard to this but I can
ask the same question "So what?" It behooves one to stay out of countries with
weird laws or regimes.
Children of US citizens happen to be US citizens even if born in
England.
What if they renounce US citizenship? You think it can't be done?
If Philip was unmarried, his mistress would not have been a Greek.
What was the Greek law on bastardy 1948 to 1964?
Oh, for Pity's Sake!
I understand that as of 1962, a Greek woman lawfully married to a
foreign man remained a Greek citizen, but her children would not be
Greeks if born before 1984. A foreign woman authomatically became a
Greek on lawful marriage.
A queen is not just "a foreign woman". Everyone in the House of Windsor
married foreigners until the sometime in the 20th Century.
Does Greek law of citizenship make exceptions on foreign queens?
LOL! They kicked out their own "foreign queen". Why would they worry about
queens of other countries?
Yes, the Windsors married foreigners. However, most of the foreign
countries concerned agreed with England that a married woman
authomatically lost her maiden citizenship. Philip, by contrast, was a
man.
I see. Then was Prince Albert, the husband of Queen Victoria, still a German
all his life? He may have talked and acted like one, but he lived in England.
After that, he owed nothing more to the German nat
|
| |
| |
Let us count the consequences:
Since Philip remained a Greek citizen in 1947 (making no attempt to
renounce the citizenship in the due manner), Elizabeth was a Greek
citizen with all that follows.
Or not?
It depends on three things. #1: Was Phillip Mountbatten a Greek citizen or a
British one at the time? #2: Does marriage to a Greek man automatically make a
British woman a Greek citizen? Especially when she does not claim to be a Greek
citizen and has no connection to Greece? #3: Would Princess Elizabeth's
(alleged) assumption of Greek citizenship automatically nullify her claim to be
the heir to the British throne and ineligible to become the Queen of England
where her father, the King, died in 1947? Especially when she never claimed to
be Greek, never lived in Greece, and neither Greece nor Britain challenged her
claim to be Queen of England in 1952?
*****
Tim Horrigan <horrigan@aol.com>
*****
|
| |
| |
Her son can't even be president of the United States.
Because he was born in Monacco, a principality, of which he will become
ruler
in due course.
Hmm, maybe, maybe not! I believe Albert Grimaldi was officially born with dual
US-Monagasque citizenship, which makes him a natural born US citizen.
I also believe that he has no plans to run for President of the US. And
although there have been less credible and less qualified candidates for this
office, he would not be a leading candidate if he did run.
Oddly, Prince Albert's citizenship does have some relevance to the original
topic of this thread, since there was a prime minister of Greece in the 1980s
who in fact was a dual Greek-American citizen.
*****
Tim Horrigan <horrigan@aol.com>
*****
|
| |
| |
yanbee2@yahoo.com (Yannis) wrote in message news:<a75bea69.0311270803.5276ef67@posting.google.com>...
jsaepuru@solo.ee (Jaak Suurpere) wrote in message > > Unless posters specifically want me to I won't go into the imbroglio
with the ex-royal's family citizenship and the law of 1994 stripping
them of it. This law could or could not (based on interpretation) also
affect Philip, Charles and the rest of this happy Greek family !
I shall a post a separate thread on that when I have time.
Most of the time, in London but they've been in and out of Greece
several times this year.
It all depends on the validity of their marriage. This raises two
issues a) religion, since they were married by Anglican rites. Under
Greek law this is recognised only provided Philip , too was Anglican
at the time. I don't think there would be any difficulty in proving
that, indeed, he had converted by then. b) the Greek royal house law.
It depends on whether Philip's marriage was "approved" by King George
II or not. I have not seen anything approving it, but then again maybe
there was something. One would have to look in the 1947 Greek
Government Gazette but it is not on-line and I don't have access to it
nor the time (alas!) to hunt for little items like that.
Correct.
Exactly what do you mean by "law on bastardy"? The problem is not
bastardy per se, it's the so called presumption of paternity or
whatever. In most countries,Greece being one of them, children born in
wedlock are presumed to have the husband as father. Therefore since
they are his children they get his citizenship. But without any
marriage there is no such presumption. One can of course "recognise"
(I'm not sure that's the correct legal term - legitimise perhaps?
Anyway, I mean a declaration accepting paternity) his child born out
of wedlock,thereby also passing on his citizenship, but Philip
certainly did not do that, at least not in the proper form. Or maybe
he did, maybe under English law the fact that he appears as the
children's father on their birth certificate is enough. Under Greek
law this is not the proper form of "recognising" paternity but perhaps
English law should cover that. This is getting more and more
complicated, now you know why lawyers charge so much!
The answer to your question is given above. IF you have a Greek father
(i.e. if paternity has been lawfully established) then the fact that
he is not married to the mother is not important. If there is no
father in the eyes of the law,then a Greek mother could, even under
the old rules, pass citizenship.
No, they're exempt as long as they don't enter Greece and continuously
reside there for 6 months. This is the reason why none of
Constantine's children has ever had to do military service in the
Greek army, even when their citizenship was not in qustion.
No, same reason as above.
They're Greek citizens, and the reverse (Greek wife, foreign father)
also applies.
Surely your interpretation of Greek citizenship excludes any reference
to (superior) international law.
It is inconceivable, for example, that Greek citizenship law would be
applied to an American or Australian diplomat of Greek origin. Surely,
you are not saying that such an individual who was posted to Greece
for six months or more is liable for military service in the Greek
army?
If, as I suspect, Greek Citizenship law does not apply in the case of
a diplomat, it probably also does not apply to a foreign Head of
State, their spouse or issue.
As for recognition of the marriage between HM and Philip, isn't it
strange to argue that there was none when the King and the entire
Greek Royal Family were present, together several Orthodox dignitaries
including the Archbishop in the UK and a prominent Orthodox nun?
Cheers,
Christopher Buyers
|
| |
| |
On 28 Nov 2003 02:15:58 GMT, marianneluban@aol.comnospam (MarianneLuban)
in misc.legal, wrote the following:
<snip>
Does it follow that e. g. a Monegasque or Thai sovereign cannot be a
citizen of any country, including, say, USA - that an US citizen who
becomes a sovereign of any country ceases to be a US citizen without
any action on his or her part?
What difference does it make? You can have dual citizenship, but the laws of
where you live are what matters. For a discussion, see
http://www.richw.org/dualcit/
A dual national must obey the laws of BOTH countries at the same time.
Dual nationals owe allegiance to both the United States and the foreign
country. They are required to obey the laws of both countries. For
example, a dual national must register with the U.S. Selective Service
System within three months of his eighteenth birthday, etc. whether he
resides in the US or not.
See:
http://travel.state.gov/americansabroad.html
http://travel.state.gov/dualnationality.html
Do American laws apply to people born in US >who go to live abroad?
Yes. Unless they change their citizenship.
Then they would no longer have to pay taxes in the US.
Er, dual nationals have to file tax returns whether they owe US taxes or
not. All dual nationals must report all worldwide income by filing an
annual U.S. income tax return, regardless of whether they owe taxes to
the U.S. or pay taxes elsewhere. Even if you renounce citizenship, and
your income is fairly high, you may still be subject to U.S. taxes for
ten years after you have renounced citizenship.
See on taxes after renunciation of citizenship:
http://www.hansenhome.demon.co.uk/USTaxes.html
http://travel.state.gov/renunciation.html
http://library.lp.findlaw.com/articles/file/00337/005064/title/subject/topic/tax%20law_income%20taxation/filename/taxlaw_1_299
Requirements for what constitutes renunication:
http://travel.state.gov/loss.html
--
Katherine Griffis-Greenberg, J.D.
DISCLAIMER:
Not a practicing attorney, and no attorney-client relationship
is created. This response is for discussion purposes only. It
isn't meant to be legal advice. If you wish legal advice, seek
out an attorney in your own state who is familar with your
state's laws and applications thereof.
|
| |
| |
marianneluban@aol.comnospam (MarianneLuban) wrote in message
news:<20031126170429.27776.00001057@mb-m06.aol.com>...
Subject: Re: Citizenship of Prince Philip of Mountbatten
From: jsaepuru@solo.ee (Jaak Suurpere)
Date: 11/26/2003 10:39 AM Pacific Standard Time
So, at least in theory, Philip, Prince Charles, Princes William and
Harry etc. etc. are all Greek citizens. In fact, even Diana was one
since at the time of her marriage to Charles (1981) the law was that
a woman marrying a Greek citizen automatically aquired Greek
citizenship. This was changed in 1984 but not retrospectively.
Unless posters specifically want me to I won't go into the imbroglio
with the ex-royal's family citizenship and the law of 1994 stripping
them of it. This law could or could not (based on interpretation)
also
affect Philip, Charles and the rest of this happy Greek family !
I'd specifically want to.
Where are the Greek royals citizens now?
Finally, if you will allow me one little remark: The original poster
asked a simple question on Greek law of citizenship. Until I came
along all the answers he got were nothing to do with the question he
asked (hardly surprising since it requires specialised technical
knowledge) but instead pointed out that the term he used (Prince
Philip of Mountbatten) was not correct. True, but we all know whom he
meant and, I don't know about you, but I do find that a little
annoying. You read a subject line and you look at the thread and
expect to find messages relevant to that subject line and what you
find instead is messages pointing out a rather obvious mistake. I
don't know about you, but I do find that a little annoying. Do please
forgive me, I don't wish to flame anyone or start a fight.
Yannis
Let us count the consequences:
Since Philip remained a Greek citizen in 1947 (making no attempt to
renounce the citizenship in the due manner), Elizabeth was a Greek
citizen with all that follows.
Or not?
Elizabeth became Queen of England on the death of her father. It
doesn't
matter whom she married prior to that. Am English sovereign cannot be a
citizen of any country--probably not even of England.
Does it follow that e. g. a Monegasque or Thai sovereign cannot be a
citizen of any country, including, say, USA - that an US citizen who
becomes a sovereign of any country ceases to be a US citizen without
any action on his or her part?
Philip did not cease being a Greek citizen.
Regardless of whether this may have changed after 1967, if that was
the case in 1947, then Philip has never been married (in Greek law)
and all his children are bastards, with all that follows.
Do American laws apply to people born in US who go to live abroad?
(For example, a second bigamous marriage will not become valid on the
death
of the first spouse.)
What is the point of all this? Even assuming the Greek law was cited
correctly here, how does it apply to Philip unless he went to Greece to
live? > Which is doubtful he ever would.
If Philip married Elizabeth, then Charles, Andrew and Edward were all
Greek citizens at least until 1994. So was Anne.
Nonsense. They were born in England.
So what?
Children of US citizens happen to be US citizens even if born in
England.
If Philip was unmarried, his mistress would not have been a Greek.
What was the Greek law on bastardy 1948 to 1964?
Does Greek law of citizenship make exceptions on foreign queens?
Yes, the Windsors married foreigners. However, most of the foreign
countries concerned agreed with England that a married woman
authomatically lost her maiden citizenship. Philip, by contrast, was a
man.
What does the US law say about the citizenship of Grace Kelly?
What was the status of bastards born of a Greek mother and foreign or
unknown father? What was the status of bastards born of a Greek father
and a foreign mother (like the UK royals)?
|
| |
| |
yanbee2@yahoo.com (Yannis) wrote in message news:<a75bea69.0311270803.5276ef67@posting.google.com>...
jsaepuru@solo.ee (Jaak Suurpere) wrote in message
Unless posters specifically want me to I won't go into the imbroglio with > > > the ex-royal's family citizenship and the law of 1994 stripping them of
it. This law could or could not (based on interpretation) also affect
Philip, Charles and the rest of this happy Greek family !
I shall a post a separate thread on that when I have time.
Most of the time, in London but they've been in and out of Greece
several times this year.
Under which passports?
Let us count the consequences:
Since Philip remained a Greek citizen in 1947 (making no attempt to
renounce the citizenship in the due manner), Elizabeth was a Greek
citizen with all that follows.
Or not?
It all depends on the validity of their marriage. This raises two
issues a) religion, since they were married by Anglican rites. Under
Greek law this is recognised only provided Philip , too was Anglican
at the time. I don't think there would be any difficulty in proving
that, indeed, he had converted by then. b) the Greek royal house law.
It depends on whether Philip's marriage was "approved" by King George
II or not. I have not seen anything approving it, but then again maybe
there was something. One would have to look in the 1947 Greek
Government Gazette but it is not on-line and I don't have access to it
nor the time (alas!) to hunt for little items like that.
Correct.
Exactly what do you mean by "law on bastardy"? The problem is not
bastardy per se, it's the so called presumption of paternity or
whatever. In most countries,Greece being one of them, children born in
wedlock are presumed to have the husband as father. Therefore since
they are his children they get his citizenship. But without any
marriage there is no such presumption. One can of course "recognise"
(I'm not sure that's the correct legal term - legitimise perhaps?
Anyway, I mean a declaration accepting paternity) his child born out
of wedlock,thereby also passing on his citizenship, but Philip
certainly did not do that, at least not in the proper form. Or maybe
he did, maybe under English law the fact that he appears as the
children's father on their birth certificate is enough. Under Greek
law this is not the proper form of "recognising" paternity but perhaps
English law should cover that. This is getting more and more
complicated, now you know why lawyers charge so much!
The answer to your question is given above. IF you have a Greek father
(i.e. if paternity has been lawfully established) then the fact that
he is not married to the mother is not important. If there is no
father in the eyes of the law,then a Greek mother could, even under
the old rules, pass citizenship.
I see.
Does it mean that a bastard born to a Greek mother before 1984, and
his wife, any exwives and children et cetera, can all be deprived of
their Greek citizenship if anyone succeeds in proving his descent from
a specific foreign man?
If Charles, Andrew and Edward were Greeks, do they owe military
service?
No, they're exempt as long as they don't enter Greece and continuously
reside there for 6 months. This is the reason why none of
Constantine's children has ever had to do military service in the
Greek army, even when their citizenship was not in qustion.
No, same reason as above.
They're Greek citizens, and the reverse (Greek wife, foreign father)
also applies.
This would apply to Beatrice and Eugenie, and Louise.
Yannis
|
| |
| |
"Jaak Suurpere" <jsaepuru@solo.ee> skrev i melding
news:e8319284.0311280119.5c15a64b@posting.google.com...
yanbee2@yahoo.com (Yannis) wrote in message
news:<a75bea69.0311270803.5276ef67@posting.google.com>...
Where are the Greek royals citizens now?
Most of the time, in London but they've been in and out of Greece
several times this year.
Under which passports?
They all received Danish diplomatic passports several years ago.
|
| |
| |
horrigan@aol.com (Horrigan) wrote in message news:<20031127223101.12252.00000937@mb-m25.aol.com>...
Her son can't even be president of the United States.
Because he was born in Monacco, a principality, of which he will become
ruler
in due course.
Hmm, maybe, maybe not! I believe Albert Grimaldi was officially born with dual
US-Monagasque citizenship, which makes him a natural born US citizen.
I also believe that he has no plans to run for President of the US. And
although there have been less credible and less qualified candidates for this
office, he would not be a leading candidate if he did run.
Prince Albert MIGHT run into trouble (if he ran for President of the
US) because of the following clause in the Cosntitution:
"If any citizen of the United States shall accept, claim, receive, or
retain any title of nobility or honour, or shall without the consent
of Congress, accept and retain any present, pension, office, or
emolument of any kind whatever, from any emperor, king, prince, or
foreign power, such person shall cease to be a citizen of the United
States, and shall be incapable of holding any office of trust or
profit under them, or either of them."
Although there are ways around this problem.
|
| |
| |
Katherine Griffis-Greenberg <egylist@griffis-consulting.com> wrote in
news:k7odsvobmb4env4tlo3kb4mis8qps3ql33@4ax.com:
On 28 Nov 2003 02:15:58 GMT, marianneluban@aol.comnospam
(MarianneLuban) in misc.legal, wrote the following:
<snip>
Does it follow that e. g. a Monegasque or Thai sovereign cannot be a
citizen of any country, including, say, USA - that an US citizen who
becomes a sovereign of any country ceases to be a US citizen without
any action on his or her part?
A dual national must obey the laws of BOTH countries at the same time.
Dual nationals owe allegiance to both the United States and the foreign
country. They are required to obey the laws of both countries. For
example, a dual national must register with the U.S. Selective Service
System within three months of his eighteenth birthday, etc. whether he
resides in the US or not.
See:
http://travel.state.gov/americansabroad.html
http://travel.state.gov/dualnationality.html
Do American laws apply to people born in US >who go to live abroad?
Er, dual nationals have to file tax returns whether they owe US taxes
or not. All dual nationals must report all worldwide income by filing
an annual U.S. income tax return, regardless of whether they owe taxes
to the U.S. or pay taxes elsewhere. Even if you renounce citizenship,
and your income is fairly high, you may still be subject to U.S. taxes
for ten years after you have renounced citizenship.
See on taxes after renunciation of citizenship:
http://www.hansenhome.demon.co.uk/USTaxes.html
http://travel.state.gov/renunciation.html
http://library.lp.findlaw.com/articles/file/00337/005064/title/subject/t
opic/tax%20law_income%20taxation/filename/taxlaw_1_299
Requirements for what constitutes renunication:
http://travel.state.gov/loss.html
Well yes, your laws say that, but laws end at the border. You can't
enforce US laws against, for example, US citizens who have never lived in
the US, have no assets in the US, and don't do business in or with the US,
unless they move to the US. There are, for example, US citizens born
abroad who have one parent born in the US. If they never come to the US,
never file a US tax return, and never register for selective service,
there is nothing anyone can do, nor probably anything anyone would care to
do. Unlike the US, most other countries don't have extraterritorial laws
of this kind, recognising that their jurisdiction overseas is in fact null
and void to begin with.
|
| |
| |
So the Greek government can order their citizens to get the Elgin marbles
returned to Greece then!
No June, you nutty old bag of racist turd
The Elgin marbles were legitimately PURCHASED by Lord Elgin and have been
*preserved* by the British museum for well over a century
The British museum still retains the original receipt relating to this
PURCHASE of said marbles
You sell something, it ceases to become your property
Get over it
|
| |
| |
The Elgin marbles were legitimately PURCHASED by Lord Elgin and have been
*preserved* by the British museum for well over a century
The British museum still retains the original receipt relating to this
PURCHASE of said marbles
I wonder if there were any conditions placed on the gift of the marbles to
the British Museum, such as perhaps that they couldn't be given away.
It would be interesting, if the Museum tried to give them to Greece (highly
unlikely I know), to see if the current Earl of Elgin and Kincardine would
be able to demand they return them to him.
|
| |
| |
So the Greek government can order their citizens to get the Elgin marbles
returned to Greece then!
Of course it can, just as I can order you to give me a million pounds.
However, I, like the Greek government, have no legal or practical way to
enforce my order.
|
| |
| |
In article <38e9db65.0311272154.116b56ea@posting.google.com> in
alt.talk.royalty, Christopher Buyers <christopher.buyers@virgin.net>
wrote:
It is inconceivable, for example, that Greek citizenship law would be
applied to an American or Australian diplomat of Greek origin.
It is inconceivable that it would _not_ be so applied, for purposes
of determining whether the person is a Greek citizen -- just as only
American law determines whether one is an American citizen.
Surely, you are not saying that such an individual who was posted
to Greecec for six months or more is liable for military service
in the Greek army?
Probably not, but not for that reason. An American or Australian
diplomat posted to Greece is not a resident of Greece.
--
Stan Brown, Oak Road Systems, Cortland County, New York, USA
http://OakRoadSystems.com
Royalty FAQs:
1. http://www.heraldica.org/faqs/britfaq.html
2. http://www.heraldica.org/faqs/atrfaq.htm
Yvonne's HRH page: http://users.uniserve.com/~canyon/prince.html
more FAQs: http://oakroadsystems.com/tech/faqget.htm
|
| |
| |
In article <bjExb.1217$WG2.254@newssvr33.news.prodigy.com> in
alt.talk.royalty, June R Harton <JUNEHARTON@prodigy.net> wrote:
So the Greek government can order their citizens to get the Elgin marbles
returned to Greece then!
You quoted about 175 lines, to add a two-line comment.
Please, EVERYONE, trim your quotes!
--
Stan Brown, Oak Road Systems, Cortland County, New York, USA
http://OakRoadSystems.com
Royalty FAQs:
1. http://www.heraldica.org/faqs/britfaq.html
2. http://www.heraldica.org/faqs/atrfaq.htm
Yvonne's HRH page: http://users.uniserve.com/~canyon/prince.html
more FAQs: http://oakroadsystems.com/tech/faqget.htm
|
| |
| |
In article <YjIxb.2141$Y06.29282@news4.e.nsc.no> in
alt.talk.royalty, Torkel Nybakk Kvaal <tn.kvaal@NOSPAMonline.no>
wrote:
[The Greek royals]
all received Danish diplomatic passports several years ago.
Why _diplomatic_ passports, rather than ordinary Danish passports.
Which Danish royals, if any, have diplomatic passports?
--
Stan Brown, Oak Road Systems, Cortland County, New York, USA
http://OakRoadSystems.com
Royalty FAQs:
1. http://www.heraldica.org/faqs/britfaq.html
2. http://www.heraldica.org/faqs/atrfaq.htm
Yvonne's HRH page: http://users.uniserve.com/~canyon/prince.html
more FAQs: http://oakroadsystems.com/tech/faqget.htm
|
| |
| |
horrigan@aol.com (Timothy Horrigan) wrote in message news:<80981f23.0311280605.49fd1fd@posting.google.com>...
horrigan@aol.com (Horrigan) wrote in message news:<20031127223101.12252.00000937@mb-m25.aol.com>...
Her son can't even be president of the United States.
Because he was born in Monacco, a principality, of which he will become
ruler
in due course.
Prince Albert MIGHT run into trouble (if he ran for President of the
US) because of the following clause in the Cosntitution:
"If any citizen of the United States shall accept, claim, receive, or
retain any title of nobility or honour, or shall without the consent
of Congress, accept and retain any present, pension, office, or
emolument of any kind whatever, from any emperor, king, prince, or
foreign power, such person shall cease to be a citizen of the United
States, and shall be incapable of holding any office of trust or
profit under them, or either of them."
Although there are ways around this problem.
There never was such a clause in the Constitution of the United
States. It was in a proposed Amendment which has never been ratified.
|
| |
| |
On 28 Nov 2003 14:53:36 GMT, Alun <alun@1stcounsel.com> in misc.legal,
wrote the following:
Katherine Griffis-Greenberg <egylist@griffis-consulting.com> wrote in
news:k7odsvobmb4env4tlo3kb4mis8qps3ql33@4ax.com:
A dual national must obey the laws of BOTH countries at the same time.
Dual nationals owe allegiance to both the United States and the foreign
country. They are required to obey the laws of both countries. For
example, a dual national must register with the U.S. Selective Service
System within three months of his eighteenth birthday, etc. whether he
resides in the US or not.
See:
http://travel.state.gov/americansabroad.html
http://travel.state.gov/dualnationality.html
Do American laws apply to people born in US >who go to live abroad?
Yes. Unless they change their citizenship.
Then they would no longer have to pay taxes in the US.
Er, dual nationals have to file tax returns whether they owe US taxes
or not. All dual nationals must report all worldwide income by filing
an annual U.S. income tax return, regardless of whether they owe taxes
to the U.S. or pay taxes elsewhere. Even if you renounce citizenship,
and your income is fairly high, you may still be subject to U.S. taxes
for ten years after you have renounced citizenship.
See on taxes after renunciation of citizenship:
http://www.hansenhome.demon.co.uk/USTaxes.html
http://travel.state.gov/renunciation.html
http://library.lp.findlaw.com/articles/file/00337/005064/title/subject/t
opic/tax%20law_income%20taxation/filename/taxlaw_1_299
Requirements for what constitutes renunication:
http://travel.state.gov/loss.html
Well yes, your laws say that, but laws end at the border. You can't
enforce US laws against, for example, US citizens who have never lived in
the US, have no assets in the US, and don't do business in or with the US,
unless they move to the US. There are, for example, US citizens born
abroad who have one parent born in the US. If they never come to the US,
never file a US tax return, and never register for selective service,
there is nothing anyone can do, nor probably anything anyone would care to
do. Unlike the US, most other countries don't have extraterritorial laws
of this kind, recognising that their jurisdiction overseas is in fact null
and void to begin with.
I would question most of these assumptions, really. There are laws in
the form of treaties between the US and other countries which
specifically apply to taxation, selective service, etc., so I would
think you need to cite specific instances where this would not apply,
and barring that, better to err on the side of caution and assume US
laws most certainly would apply to the situation of a dual national even
if he/she had never been in the U.S.
I can assure you, for example, there is a dual tax law treaty between
the UK and US, and reporting of all income must occur to IRS, no matter
whether one has US income or an income base located _within_ the US.
Americans can be taxed for their income world-wide, and not just for
their US-based income: it all depends upon the wording of any dual tax
treaty, and/or whether exemptions occur.
However, a foreign-based US citizen or dual national still has to
_report_ total income for all sources, US- or foreign-based, whether one
has to pay IRS tax on the income or not. With other countries, for
example, monies derived from income there is either fully- or
partially-taxable by the US IRS system. This is why many expatriate
families get into trouble with the US IRS, thinking that if they haven't
been in the US over years (or even never) they don't owe IRS taxes for
income they earned overseas. That's simply not true.
For more information, see:
http://www.expatexchange.com/lib.cfm?networkID=159&articleID=1019
Elimination of Dual Taxation During Your Foreign Assignment
According to the selective service system in the US, yes, one _does_
have to register whether one lives in the US or not, if one wishes to
maintain his status as an American citizen. The only exemption to this,
according to Selective Service, is where "...A dual national whose other
country of nationality has an agreement with the U.S. which specifically
provides for an exemption is exempt from induction."
See: http://www.sss.gov/FSaliens.htm
--
Katherine Griffis-Greenberg, J.D.
DISCLAIMER:
Not a practicing attorney, and no attorney-client relationship
is created. This response is for discussion purposes only. It
isn't meant to be legal advice. If you wish legal advice, seek
out an attorney in your own state who is familar with your
state's laws and applications thereof.
|
| |
| |
Stan Brown <the_stan_brown@fastmail.fm> wrote in message news:<MPG.1a317dc5753cc03698b851@news.odyssey.net>...
In article <38e9db65.0311272154.116b56ea@posting.google.com> in
alt.talk.royalty, Christopher Buyers <christopher.buyers@virgin.net>
wrote:
It is inconceivable that it would _not_ be so applied, for purposes
of determining whether the person is a Greek citizen -- just as only
American law determines whether one is an American citizen.
No, the two are not the same. Greek citizenship law, being based on
blood, claims extra-territoriality, quite different from US
citizenship law. Thus Greek law determines that irrespective of what
American law may be, Americans of Greek origin are Greeks and claims
certain jurisdiction and duties from them.
It is most probably in conflict with the citizenship laws of other
countries, the Vienna conventions on diplomats and heads of state and
European Human Rights conventions too.
Surely, you are not saying that such an individual who was posted
to Greecec for six months or more is liable for military service
in the Greek army?
Probably not, but not for that reason. An American or Australian
diplomat posted to Greece is not a resident of Greece.
Whatever the reason may be, that reason 'is' most important. It
establishes that Greek law recognizes that Greek citizenship law is
not paramount. It is superceded, overruled or defers to a higher
authority than Greek citizenship law over people of Greek origin.
Cheers,
Christopher Buyers
|
| |
| |
| | |
