Posted on 07/06/2012 5:47:01 AM PDT by annalex
Voters in Liechtenstein on Sunday rejected a move to limit the powers of the royal family in a controversial referendum seeking to abolish the ruling prince's right to veto legislation.
|
|
| Crown Prince Alois |
Crown Prince Alois, who was appointed acting head of state by his father Hans-Adam II in 2004, had threatened to quit if the referendum passed and eliminated the veto right which is enshrined in the constitution.
The prince on Sunday welcomed "a clear result which (is) a good base for meeting future challenges facing the principality".
His father said in a statement that he was "happy and grateful that a large majority of the population wanted to continue the 300-year-old effective partnership between the people and the royals."
Voter turnout was high at 82.9 percent.
A number of voters who rejected the proposals expressed their satisfaction on the Facebook page "For God, the prince and the country".
"There, it's very clear for the second time this century," wrote Micha Tarnutzer, referring to a previous attempt to modify the constitution in 2003.
"I hope the 23.9 percent who supported abolishing the veto right have taken the result into account and won't try this again in nine years."
The movement to limit the royal powers first gained steam last year, when Alois, a 43-year-old father of four, threatened to veto a referendum legalising abortion.
A committee of supporters of the abolition, who campaigned with the slogan "Yes, so that your voice counts" said it was "disappointed" by the result.
"We had hoped that this fundamental right would have greater approval," the committee said in a statement.
With some 36,000 inhabitants, the bucolic monarchy sandwiched between Austria and Switzerland enjoys one of the highest living standards in the world thanks to its industrial and financial sectors.
Isn’t it amazing how the abortionists are willing to destroy anything in their quest to be able to murder children?
Here's a question:
Is the right to legislate over the royal property in any way "fundamental right"? I don't think the Liechtenstein subjects would like the Parliament to legislate over their property.
Observe that the tangible issue before them is abortion. Evidently three in every four Liechtensteinians consider the royal veto as something that protects their rights and those of their children against the Parliament.
The monarchist sentiment is growing: in 2003 the country passed a new constitution strengthening the monarchy with 64% of the vote. Now it is 76% in favor of this key constitutional provision.
Showing the EU how federalism works.
However, if the prince had resigned, we could have given Lichtenstein John Roberts.
I would propose that some regimes are possessed by Satan and so destruction becomes the underlying motive for everything they do, whether it is apparent or not. The USSR was one such regime, the EU is another.
Liechtenstein is like another canton in Switzerland. It uses the Swiss Franc and the Swiss postal system. You pass through it in the blink of an eye as you drive through northeastern Switzerland heading towards Austria.
I lived in Canton Glarus in the 80’s and occasionally we would drive to Vaduz to visit a disco there that was quite popular at the time.
The Wonders of actually having someone who cares about the future stability of his country in-charge!
The principle of allowing various interests an effective veto is the basis for John C. Calhoun’s theory, expressed in this essay “A Disquisition on Government.” The principle is very interesting, and is an almost sure way to prevent one faction from ruling over everyone else. As Calhoun wrote, it also forces disparate interests to compromise, which makes for a more reasonable and moderate regime. He gave historical examples, some quite interesting.
There can be very little harm in the monarch’s veto of abortion. It does not hurt anyone to protect the unborn, after all. It is easy to tell which is the totalitarian side in this controversy. A strong hint is that the side which wishes mass death is probably not benign.
My daughter was in Liechtenstein at some point today - on her way to Austria as part of a seven country tour. I’m glad she is able to see Europe while it is still Europe. I will most likely never get that chance.
Does he know how to play the Leichtenstiener Polka ?
With the highest per capita income in the world...I doubt Liechtenstein wants to change much
Also, Prince Alois and Prince Hans-Adam make Obamao look like Joe Stalin on a bad day
I lived in Switzerland from ‘82 through August ‘90...visited Hungary and Yugoslavia while they were still part of the Soviet block, visited Czechoslavakia over Easter in 1990 after the fall of the Soviet empire, visited West Berlin in 1988 behind the Iron Curtain.
Much has changed since, but still many things are the same as they ever were.
Freep-mail me to get on or off my pro-life and Catholic List:
Please ping me to note-worthy Pro-Life or Catholic threads, or other threads of general interest.
Well, I am, quite simple, a monarchist, so you don’t have to convince me. The royal veto, provided the monarch is himself legitimate, is a necessary element of government, which cannot be replaced by a constitution, no matter how well written. I am all for the democratic process, but in a consultative role.
Now that you've mentioned him, let's not forget that any dictator has to go a long route gaining influence and placating opponents before he can start jailing and murdering them. Stalin, for example, rose to power through the intra-party democratic process, and very gradually; Hitler was popularly elected outright.
I point that out because often monarchy is mixed up with dictatorships.
I wouldn’t mind learning to speak Volapük and settling there.
Scenic place.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.