The present constitution devotes a great deal of space and attention to the person and the position of the king — which is understandable in view of the fact that it was drafted in a time of post... Show moreThe present constitution devotes a great deal of space and attention to the person and the position of the king — which is understandable in view of the fact that it was drafted in a time of post-revolutionary royal restoration. The Concept’s tenor, apart from technical improvements, is a different one. It proposes that the king’s position be increasingly given the character of a public office — with an easy abdication procedure and the possibility of not appointing an heir to the throne. Mystique should be practically non-existent. Expressions like ‘His Majesty’ have disappeared; words like ‘crown’, ‘king’ etc. should no longer be capitalized, the expressions of humility in the communication between the monarch and the parliament should no longer be used. Also the king’s formal role should be diminished. He would no longer be president of the Council of State, and no longer appoint the presidents of both Chambers of parliament. More important is, that he would no longer possess the formal executive power (as he has in the present constitution) — the new version would be ‘the ministers and the king together constitute the government’ and ‘the king acts as head of the government’. From a political point of view, the Concept does not deal with current discussions on the question whether there should be a king at all. In the new version the confusion in the use of the words ‘king’, ‘government’, and ‘crown’ which exists in the present constitution is continued. For example it would not yet be clear whether the king has the right to dissolve the parliament. Show less
