THE LONGEST CASE OF INJUSTICE AND HUMAN RIGHTS ABUSE IN THE HISTORY OF ROMANIA:

After reading the documents, you will understand why the Portuguese and French Courts both ruled by the Code Napoleon and members of the European Community, gave justice to HRH Prince Carol Mircea of Romania after thirty five (35) years.

UPDATE: "Prince of Paul of Romania, wins again in front of the Romanian Courts - The Court of Appeal of Bucharest recognizes that his father, Prince Carol Mircea, is the first born and legitimate son of King Carol II" (see NEWS )

When the Romanian Courts finally studied the documents, after so much misinformation during Communist times, they also agreed with the decision of Portugal (where King Carol II died and where the Process of Succession was started) and corrected a human rights abuse with the decision of the Court of Alexandria, Romania (1995) and the Court of Appeal, Bucharest (1999). It will be 81 years since Prince Carol Mircea's birth and the deliberate non-recognition of his rights. The Supreme Court of Romania should make its final decision on February 5th, 2002. This has again been postponed to the 3rd of December 2002.

It is a shame that my uncle, ex-King Michael, badly advised, is appealing to the Supreme Court of Romania after losing in 3 countries (Portugal, France and Romania) against his own older brother, Prince Carol Mircea. Michael is aware that during his own reign (1940 to 1947), payments continued to be made to the Romanian Embassy in Paris through the National Bank of Romania to my father, Prince Carol Mircea. Prince Carol Mircea had never signed this agreement. In 1921 he was 1 year old. It is important to point out that my father could not return to his own country and let the truth be known to the Romanian people. The last time he was allowed to visit Romania was with his mother in 1938 for the funeral of his grandmother, HM Queen Marie. Special Government permission was given on this occasion for 24 hours.

The facts speak for themselves. Carol Mircea was born from a religious Orthodox marriage in a country (Russia) where only religious marriages were recognized (See original marriage certificate). The Orthodox Church never annulled this marriage. The Church refused to participate in this illegality. The civil authorities decided to annul the marriage, illegally, through the Tribunal of Ilfov in 1919 after delivering to the Palace of Cotroceni the Court's notification to HRH Crown Prince Carol of Romania and Princess Ioana. They refused to acknowledge this. Yet the Tribunal took place and annulled the marriage civilly, without granting them their right to appeal or their legal right to be present in the Court to defend themselves. The reason given by the Court was clandestinity. Note the letter of the Romanian Consul General of Odessa to Prime Minister Maghiloman regarding the solemn legal marriage conducted in the Orthodox Church in front of distinguished witnesses. It clearly was not a clandestine nor morganatic as they had not included such conditions for Royal marriages in the Constitution. When the boy was born, Crown Prince Carol wrote public letters to acknowledge and recognized the birth of his son. Even Queen Marie recorded in her personal diary the birth of Carol Mircea. Politicians like Maghiloman recorded the birth in his political diary. Prime Minister Vaida Voevod declared on the front page of the well-known newspaper "Epoca", that "in front of God and the people, he is the rightful child of the Crown Prince of Romania". The paper even reproduced the letter of the Crown Prince addressed to his wife, Princess Ioana (Zizi), in which he recognized the coming birth of his son. The National and foreign press, the Government and The Royal Family were aware of my father's birth. So how could the authorities have given orders not to write the name of the father, Crown Prince Carol, the future King Carol II, on the birth certificate?

The Prime Minister Vaida Voevod wrote in his memoirs (which where published in 1995 in Cluj Napoca), very clearly, on page 46 "...It was a violation of the Constitution and an injustice not to put the name of the child's father on the Birth Certificate. I hope that this will be rectified in the future".
In fact, this is a flagrant violation of the human rights of Prince Carol Mircea. Ex-King Michael must acknowledge that we are in a Republic where the "Code Napoleon" is in use. Therefore, it is the legal aspects that rule and not Royal decisions. The two brothers have equal rights. In any case, 2 European Community countries, that are also observing, like Romania, the Napoleanic Code and The Romanian Orthodox Church (note the cassette shown on TVR1 of Father Galeriu's declaration) consider that the first marriage of King Carol II was a legal marriage, illegally annulled and that my father, is the rightful, first-born son of the King. I have faith in the independence of the Romanian Supreme Court.

Conclusion:
If the government's lawyer had read the Consul General's letter (see bellow), which I'm sure he did, he knew the marriage of HRH the Crown Prince Carol ( the future King Carol II) to Princess Ioana (Lambrino), could not be annulled in any way, legal. This is why the lawyer's advise to the government was to go outside Bucharest, to Ilfov, where it would be less public. This is also, why the French and Portuguese courts were able to prove that the annulment was illegal, as in fact, in all three countries (Romania, France and Portugal) the legal system is the same: "The Code Napoleon". The reasons for the annulment was "clandestinity", which, in fact, was not the case, since you can see on the original marriage certificate of the Crown Prince that everything was legal, and there were witnesses present during the ceremony. It was clearly political influence!.
________________________________

The Royal Archives:
(The Archives of State Bucharest)

Letter and documents sent to Prime Minister Marghiloman by Consul General S. Grecianu

No. 736

Annex: # 1
Odessa, 28 September, 1918

"Mr. Prime Minister,

Referring to the letter you had the kindness to send me on the 24TH. of September, concerning the marriage of His Royal Highness Prince Carol, I have the honor to report the following:
In this office, there does not exist a proper file for the marriage but only the original telegram, here attached, from His Royal Highness, addressed to His Majesty the King. Also, there is the resume of my telegram, no. 674, dated 31 of August 1918, of which a copy was sent in accordance with the instructions of the Austro-Hungarian High Command. It was sent by mistake, it seems, by messenger, to Iasi, instead of being given to me, personally. Also, included is the resume of my present report no. 686 of 2/15, which your Excellency received.

The marriage of HRH Prince Carol II and Miss Lambrino was held in the Church of Pocrovskaia. I personally went to speak to His Holiness, The Protoiereu Saranski (in the Russian Church Hierarchy). In Russia, civil marriages do not exist, only religious ceremonies. The Church does not keep civil acts in their files (such as birth, marriages and death documents). However, in our case, I saw the original document, signed by His Royal Highness, with a translation, attached to my report no. 686. See below.

To His Excellency
Mr. Al. Marghiloman
Prime Minister and The Minister of the Interior (Home Secretary)
etc., etc., etc."

In addition, there exists only one, obligatory Public Notary act in which two witnesses, Mr. Serdici and the Russian Officer Sentovici, certified that the married couple are not closely related in any way. This document was legalized at the Public Notary by Mr. Tfetcoff, and dated 31 August 1918.

I asked His Holiness Protoiereu Saranski to send me a legalized act, as well as, a certified copy of the Marriage Certificate and the priest promised to deliver this to me by Monday or Tuesday. Probably, after having asked the advice of The Archbishop.
In regards to the marriage, I heard that the ceremony was formal and solemn, the Church was decorated and His Royal Highness was in full uniform. Also, during the interview with His Holiness, I was informed that Prince Carol presented all the necessary identification forms and his check, printed as His Royal Highness from Credit Lyonnais of Odessa, in the sum of 200.000 lei.

With regards to the Marriage Certificate, it was made in conformity with the law here.

Article 152 of our Civil Code recognizes the validity of this marriage and article 171 cancels any obligation of inscribing, in the country of origin, the marriage act. For your information, there also exists, in other countries, the principle of "locus regit actum", which includes the registering of the act in a legal office. (This does not apply, the marriage is, therefore, totally legal).

In fact, these above-mentioned facts motivated me to refuse the legalization of this certificate in question, which Captain Serdici had asked me to do, (*see the legalize translated, Romanian version) and telling him that, legally, it was not necessary to do it.

In regards to the act itself, I understand, it seems there was one mistake. Concerning the age of Miss Lambrino. In fact, to my knowledge, Miss Lambrino, who I have not the honor to know personally (but with whom I am distantly related because her uncle, General Lambrino, married one of my distant cousins), is not 22, as written in the certificate, but I believe, 26, if not more. This mistake can in no way cause the annulment of the marriage. It only shows that it was made in haste, and the priest forgot to check the birth certificates of the couple, as he should have.

In Russia, the only way to attack this marriage is solely through "The Ecclesiastic Laws", which does not easily accept such an annulment, only after a very long procedure and only in cases of bigamy, or if the couple is closely related by blood, which is not permitted. Such a marriage can also bring about the punishment of the priest who married the couple. (The marriage of HRH Prince Carol met all the legal standards and thus, is totally recognized both religiously and civilly).

Please accept, Mr. Prime Minister, the assurance of my highest esteem, and profound devotion.

The General Consul
S. Grecianu"