How a princess can lose her Dutch nationality – and what that says about our laws.

That the Dutch Oranjes, the Oranje-Nassau family, descend from present-day Germany is already known to most people. William I his national anthem already clearly stated “of German blood”. But that does not mean much, most Dutch people have foreign roots if you go back a bit. But what about our royal family and other nationalities more recently?

With the French revolution(s) the modern nation also came into being and the concept of nationality/citizenship took its current form. People no longer belonged feudally to a king as a subject but belonged to the country. With the end of the Dutch 80-year civil war there was already a form of the Netherlands, with over time different structures and names. But due to the age of enlightenment, which caused yet another civil war in 1786, this only resulted in the current Kingdom of the Netherlands in 1813. The Royal House (somewhat forced) went with the times and modernised, the country and its royal house, in a ‘constitutional monarchy’. We are still subjects in name, despite the fact that in our modern democracy we do not always have to be submissive.

In the past, the royal family has mainly behaved feudally with regard to marriages etc. This regularly meant that new family members came from across the borders. In addition, it used to be reasonably organised which territory would belong to which family, prince, king or queen. Because that was usually what a marriage was about. But with nationalism and the emergence of nationality, this is something different. Now one belongs to one’s own nationality and country, democratically regulated by law. This means that today a royal sometimes has a claim to multiple nationalities. In the past it was a claim to territories and power, now to a passport and thus (quite) a bit different.

Internationally, and nationally, nationality is arranged by law in such a way that one has that nationality and automatically receives it. Even if you may not use it by getting a passport etc. Nationality is your ‘status’, organised by the laws of the country. The Netherlands introduced the first nationality law in 1893 and today it is called the Kingdom Act on Dutch Nationality (RWN). But the law today still contains old principles from 1893 and earlier. Whereby one can also automatically, unintentionally, by law (by operation of law) lose one’s own nationality. This has happened to many Dutch people, especially after the changes in the law of 1985 and 2003 with an estimated 76,000 to a few hundred thousand. Because loss is automatic, the government has no insight into this and therefore does not know the exact numbers either. This loss mainly has to do with having or receiving another nationality. And sometimes you cannot avoid receiving another nationality through your parents and family.

Her Royal Highness Princess Beatrix
For example. Princess Beatrix has the Dutch nationality, but due to her direct descent from Princess Sophia of the Palatinate, she also was born a British citizen/national. This through the British Princess Sophia Naturalisation Act of 1705. This old British law is since 1948 no longer automatically in force, but it still applies to Beatrix because she was born ten years earlier. This followed the ius sanguinis (right of blood) principle, nationality through the parent(s). So she has had both nationalities since birth. The royal family states that she has never applied for a British passport (travel document), and it there is no information whether or not she has given up her British nationality. So, as far as we know, she still has both nationalities today. Very nice! But beware, she thus also runs the preventable risk of automatically losing her Dutch nationality today due to the current Clock (RWN Art 15 paragraph 1c).

Catharina-Amalia Beatrix Carmen Victoria (Amalia), Princess of Oranje, Princess of the Netherlands, Princess of Oranje-Nassau.
Despite the 1948 change in British law, family can still claim the British nationality/citizenship through this act. Princess Amalia may not only be Dutch and perhaps Argentinian, but may also have become British upon request via the Princess Sophia’s Naturalisation Act of 1705. If she had done so, then according to Dutch law she would have automatically and immediately lost her Dutch nationality, RWN Art 15 paragraph 1a. Unless this happened when she was still a minor.

She can also obtain Argentinean nationality by an Argentinean Option procedure (Article 1 paragraph 2 of the Argentinean nationality law). Option is different from naturalisation. With Option you choose to use your right, which cannot be denied to you. You ‘opt’ for a nationality. With naturalisation it is a request. Children who are born outside Argentina do not automatically receive nationality through their parent as is the law in the Netherlands. But those children do have an Option right to do so.

If the King and Queen had done this before she came of age, she would have remained Dutch by exception under Dutch law (Article 16, paragraph 2a), and now has two (or more?) nationalities. There is no information about this, so it is possible that she also has Argentine nationality. But I suspect that this has not been done. If she were to want to do this herself now as an adult, she could lose her Dutch nationality. It is a great pity that she is faced with such a difficult choice, because she still has parents and family with ties in both countries. There are still somelegal routes for her to legally obtain both nationalities. Also for any other person in such a situation. But that is rather cumbersome and practically unfeasible for many. For a princess this would not have to be a problem. Anyway, it is now unclear whether or not she would have two (or more) nationalities.

Now, when applying for a passport, Dutch people have to prove that they are (still) Dutch. Can she also prove that she has not adopted these nationalities? Will Princess Amalia be denied a Dutch passport because she has not been able to sufficiently prove this? Because regular Dutch people/citizens are regularly denied passports for this reason. It is up to the person to prove to the government that they are (still) Dutch. If she loses her nationality, her succession to the throne would also be in jeopardy. But all this is unlikely and, as far as I am concerned, a hypothetical example to show how regular citizens are treated slightly differently.

The Royal House Membership Act, Article 6 states:
“Membership of the Royal House is not acquired in the absence of Dutch nationality and ends upon loss of Dutch nationality.”

According to the Government Information Service (RVD), the royal family uses regular passports. And despite the fact that these are issued in the name of the king himself, the reality is that the government issues them. The king would therefore have no influence (or should not have any influence) on such a situation. But the royal family has/had to deal with nationality issues more often in the past and possibly used some influence (lawfully). These are not always easy situations and can be confusing for many people. And confusion can result in loss. This can happen to anyone, for example I have had amongst others Dutch diplomats and lawyers as clients who had lost their Dutch nationality unknowingly and with great regret. It can happen to anyone.

Margriet Francisca, Princess of the Netherlands, Princess of Oranje-Nassau, Princess of Lippe-Biesterfeld
Confusion! Princess Margriet was born in Canada in 1943. Or was that not Canada? The room of the hospital where she was born in 1943 was temporarily declared extraterritorial. Legally, this room did not belong to Canadian territory, but also not to the Netherlands. There was a lot of focus on her being born outside the Netherlands and there was a fear (incorrectly) that this would stand in the way of any succession to the throne.

It was the Second World War and I can imagine that Mr William van Tets, the secretary of Crown Princess Juliana, did not travel around with the necessary law books. Because his request was unnecessary. A reason given is that the succession to the throne might be in danger according to the Dutch constitution. But the constitution of 1938 has no such provisions. The Constitution says nothing, and has never said anything, about the birthplace or nationality of the King or the heirs to the throne. It is therefore still somewhat unclear why the royal family requested this, or whether this confused request perhaps came from the government in exile in London?

In any case, having or acquiring another nationality at birth, or being born in another country, had no influence on the succession to the throne, or Dutch nationality, of the princess at the time. According to the Dutch constitution and nationality law at the time, she would simply receive Dutch nationality through her father (ius sanguinis). Her father, Prince Bernhard, had been naturalised as a Dutch citizen a few years earlier in 1936. The Dutch Nationality and Residency Act, applicable from 1 July 1893 to 1 September 1948, stated in article 1:
“Dutch nationals by birth are:
a. the legitimate, legitimised or acknowledged by the father natural child, of whom the father possesses the status of Dutch national at the time of birth;”

It was therefore incorrect to state that the Princess could not be heir to the throne if she had been born outside the Netherlands, or if she had also had British/Canadian nationality by birth in Canada. Canadian law also used the ius soli (law of the land) principle, nationality by birth in the country. Many countries have that, but in the Netherlands today only in limited situations. And the irony is that she already received British nationality at birth, also in her case through (ius sanguinis) the British Princess Sophia’s Naturalisation Act of 1705. This was (at the time) apparently unknown or overlooked.

Canada could have saved the approach on diplomatic immunity, extraterritoriality with respect to the territory. It took quite a bit to achieve extraterritoriality. Diplomatic immunity and designating the hospital room as diplomatic territory would still have been Canadian territory according to the Vienna Convention. According to the Dutch that was insufficient.

A legal team led by Deputy Attorney General Frederick P. Varcoe drafted the law in the form of a proclamation, which was approved by the Cabinet. Governor General Alexander Cambridge then issued an Order-in-Council to enact the proclamation into law. The proclamation was issued on behalf of George VI on November 27, 1942, and published in the Canada Gazette on December 26. It read:

“That any place in Canada within which Her Royal Highness the Princess Juliana of the Netherlands may be confined shall, for the period of the lying-in and to the extent of actual occupation for such purpose, be extra-territorial, and for such purpose Her Royal Highness the Princess Juliana and any child that shall be born shall be accorded immunity from criminal, civil and military jurisdiction, whether Dominion or Provincial.”

In January 1943, shortly before the birth of Princess Margriet, the Supreme Court of Canada ruled: “The authority vested in the Governor General in Council by the War Measures Act is legislative in its character; and an order in council passed in conformity with the conditions prescribed by, and the provisions of, that Act, i.e. a legislative enactment such as should be deemed necessary and advisable by reason of war, have the effect of an Act of Parliament.”

And with that, a piece of Canada temporarily became unnecessarily no longer Canada. This for the birth of a Dutch princess on stateless territory. It was war, and the law was already complex enough, so confusion about the Constitution, laws, etc. Given the royal family’s ties with the British Empire, perhaps there were other considerations? Perhaps they wanted to prevent Princess Margriet from having any rights to the British crown? In any case, it is unclear why all this happened at the time.

The Constitution – to amend, or not?
Unfortunately, the Dutch constitution does not ‘protect’ the nationality of citizens, and therefore also not the royal family. The nationality law, currently the Kingdom Act on Dutch Nationality (RWN), can therefore result in the loss of Dutch nationality. Also automatic, unintentional and often loss being unaware.

We may hope that this does not happen to a member of the royal family. For the royal family, such a loss is relatively easy to correct. Because here the king does have some possibilities that are much more difficult for regular citizens, or former Dutch nationals. But to prevent the loss, no, in that the members of the royal family are equal to all citizens. It would be nice if the constitution could be amended with more protection against automatic loss and/or the taking away of someone’s nationality, for everyone. This kind of loss is not possible in many countries because the constitution there does protect nationality. There the state, or law, cannot take away someone’s nationality.

For example in South Africa where in a recent ruling of the constitutional court a loss provision, which closely resembles the Dutch one, has been declared invalid after decades. South Africans no longer automatically lose their nationality, but can still give it up themselves. Or for example in Argentina where nationality cannot be taken away, but also cannot be given up. With Argentina we come to our penultimate example.

Queen Máxima, Princess of the Netherlands, Princess of Oranje-Nassau, citizen of Argentina
Queen Máxima could not have given up her Argentine nationality during or after her Dutch naturalisation. On 17 May 2001 Máxima obtained the Dutch nationality. According to our law then, and now, she did not have to give up or lose her Argentine nationality. This is because Argentine law did not allow this. This exception in Dutch law applies to everyone. There was no question of a privileged position in this.

But on the other hand, there were certain exceptions made for her naturalisation. Given how quickly and easily this was approved, there is some privileged situation here, but it is/was still in accordance with the law.

The engagement was formally announced on 30 March 2001 and they married on 02 February 2002. So the naturalisation followed 1 month and 17 days (48 days) after the formal announcement of engagement. An engagement has no consequences in Dutch nationality law. There possibly also has been no question of a naturalisation application at the municipality or embassy. Regular applicants sometimes have to wait for many months just to submit the application and then have to wait up to a year for the decision, then perhaps another few months for the oath ceremony.

In normal/regular situations, nationality follows someone who has been resident in the Netherlands for 5 years (Article 8 paragraph 1c) or longer, or someone who has been married to a Dutch national for 3+ years and has been living together for that period (application possible worldwide, but not while living in the country of the other nationality).

As far as is known, the couple met in/around 1999. And Máxima moved to Brussels in/around May 2000, where she worked and possibly resided until April 2001. Apparently she only formally came to live in the Netherlands after the marriage. According to current law, we may also include a period of cohabitation while not being registered, but factually living together, in the Netherlands. But that did not seem to be the case then, and was not yet possible by law at the time. The government officials still like to make a fuss about that these days. So there was no question of living together in the Netherlands or elsewhere for 3+ years.

It is also unlikely that Máxima could have been considered integrated/ingeburgerd (Article 8 paragraph 1d) at the time. Integration is nowadays, and also since 2001, no longer intended as a support for integration as it used to be. But today unfortunately integration laws are used as an extra threshold to keep people out of the country, and thus out of society until they are deemed worthy.

So, according to the nationality law applicable from 01 October 1998 to 31 March 2003, Máxima may not have met the requirements set in law, Article 8 paragraph 1c and 1d, for naturalisation. However, the law does allow the Council of State to make exceptions to this. This does not happen often, but exceptions are made occasionally, for example in the case of the 103-year-old former Dutch military pilot. This is possible according to the nationality law Article 10 paragraph 1.

Article 10, paragraph 1: “We may, having heard the Council of State of the Kingdom, grant Dutch nationality in special cases, by deviating from the provisions of Article 8, paragraph 1, opening sentence and under a, c and d, and Article 9, paragraph 1, opening sentence and under c.”

Despite the medieval fuss here and there about this alien queen, she was eventually accepted by most Dutch people, if not all. Despite the fact that this concerns the Royal House, this is an ordinary couple in love, an ordinary family, and they have just as much right to a life together. The Argentinian-Dutch Queen of the Netherlands has since clearly integrated herself positively into Dutch society and the hearts of many.

Just like many of us with an international background, and feet and hands in different countries and cultures. Just like every person, we are unique and different from each other. In my opinion, such differences are allowed. The more languages ​​and different cultures/customs enter the country, the more value enters. Because after all, a diverse body is stronger than a one-sided body. And don’t worry, the good norms and values ​​grow because of this and the bad ones become less. But it is not easy to be accepted in another country like the Netherlands. Or to adopt its identity. Again, we are and remain unique people, whether you have always lived in the Netherlands, or have just moved there.

In 2007, Máxima explained how she thinks that it is great that the Netherlands has such diversity. A country where people accept foreigners. The reality is unfortunately that the Netherlands is very xenophobic and that is precisely an issue in the country. Fortunately, she may never have had to experience it that way, and that is truly a privileged position. In a 2007 speech, she explained:

“About seven years ago, my search for the Dutch identity began. I was helped by many kind and wise experts. I had the privilege of meeting many people. To see, hear and taste so much of the Netherlands. It was a wonderful and rich experience for which I am extremely grateful. But ‘the’ Dutch identity? No, I have not found it. The Netherlands is: large windows without curtains, so that everyone can look inside. But also: attaching importance to privacy and cosiness. The Netherlands is: one biscuit with tea. But also: enormous hospitality and warmth. The Netherlands is: sobriety and control. Pragmatism. But also: experiencing intense emotions together. The Netherlands is far too versatile to be captured in one cliché. ‘The’ Dutchman does not exist. As consolation, I can tell you that ‘the’ Argentinian does not exist either. That is why I find it very interesting that the title of the WRR report is not ‘The Dutch Identity’. But: ‘Identification with the Netherlands’. That leaves room for development. And for diversity.”

King Willem-Alexander
King Willem-Alexander has no Oranjes in his male genealogy. The titles in it are/were more a combination of domain possession, power, and being the head of the house. With Willem III, the male line of Willem I came to an end in 1702. And in that respect, the nobility in Europe was fairly modern. This ultimately resulted in the house and the title passing from the Queens Wilhelmina, Juliana and Beatrix to Willem-Alexander. Modern and no problem. But because the nationality law since the first law (1893) mainly uses the ius sanguinis (right of blood) principle, and until 1985 followed the male blood line, nationality is yet another consideration.

Willem-Alexander had a father of German origin (Prince Claus), a grandfather of German origin (Prince Bernhard), and further relatives of German origin; great-grandfather (Prince Hendrik), great-great-grandmother (Princess and Queen Regent Emma).

But at the birth of Willem-Alexander (1967), his father (Prince Claus) already had Dutch nationality. Prince Claus was naturalised on 08 December 1965 and married Princess Beatrix on 10 March 1966. If Prince Claus had been German, and they had married before 1964, Beatrix could have lost her Dutch nationality. Before 1964, the Dutch law stated that women followed the nationality of their married man, which resulted in automatic loss and often in statelessness of many women. With the changes in the law in 1964 and 1985, this discrimination disappeared from the law. However, until 1985, it was the case that children only followed the nationality of the married man or the single mother. If one had a Dutch mother and a foreign father, one did not receive Dutch nationality at birth. This can be corrected with the change in the law in 2010. But I digress here to regular citizens their issues.

In 1965, when Prince Claus became Dutch, he would have automatically lost his German nationality according to German law at the time. There may be a possibility that he would have remained German by applying for permission, but I do not know enough about German law at the time to be able to confirm that. In addition, it is unlikely that this would have been wanted by the family at the time. For your information, German law has since been modernised and now allows dual nationality.

It is therefore highly likely that Willem-Alexander only has Dutch nationality. He may be entitled to German and British nationality, but with the risk of losing his Dutch nationality. But he has the right, just like any other Dutch national, to take the Argentine nationality, from his spouse, without losing his Dutch nationality. Did he do that? Unknown and unlikely.

Family and Country
Having the same nationality is important for many people in order to be able to guarantee the unity of the family. To be able to move freely in more than one country, work, study, etc. It is unlikely that the Royal Family will have to deal with such issues that a member would also wanted to have another nationality. In that respect, they do have a privileged position where it is much easier for them to move internationally and to keep, or get family to stay with them. But if one wants to have another nationality, if one does not already have one, then there are legal possibilities to do so. The Royal Family is ultimately just like everyone else, an ordinary family… and yet… sometimes a royal has an advantage. But why not. I grant them this, and everyone else.

The Royal House Communications Secretariat has “no further information to provide”

---

Opinion by Kris von Habsburg
Specialist Dutch Nationality Lawyer (jurist)
Nijmegen (NL) born and raised, European, Dutch, British, and Australian

It would be nice if the law really modernised, the constitution was changed and our nationality was protected. Then I could quit my job and find something else to live on. Despite that being an uncertain future, I look forward to it!