The Legality of the Gharios - Ghassan Claim
To better understand the Gharios-Ghassan Royal claim we must understand the History of the Dynasty versus the International jurisprudence of the Dynastic Law.
History
The Gharios-Ghassan Dynasty was restored in 2009 by H.I.R.H. Prince Mauricio Ahnume Guérios based on the notable blood link of the Gharios (Guérios in Brazil) Family with the Sheiks Chemor of Lebanon and therefore, the Ghassanid Kings.
Prince Mauricio proved by birth certificates his connection by male line with the last head of the Gharios Family known in public literature, Fares Mansour Gharios. Is notable by encyclopedias, that Fares Mansour Gharios was the descendant of the Christian Sheiks Chemor Al-Khoury from Lebanon, the direct descendants from the Ghassanid Kings and the Byzantine Emperors from the Nikephoros Dynasty. Some scholars state that the Nikephoros Dynasty is the origin of the Macedonian Dynasty of Byzantine Emperors.
The Ghassanid Dynasty began with members of the Sheba Royal Family in the 3rd Century leaving Yemen and founding a new Country near the Ghassan spring in Houran, the present Syria. Some scholars state that the Roman Emperor Philip the Arab (204-249 A.D.) came from the Ghassanid Dynasty. After the end of the Ghassanid Kingdom, which was defeated by the Muslins at the Yarmuk battle in the 7th Century, the Royal Family took refuge at the Mount Lebanon for centuries. It is pacific that from this family came the Nikephoros Dynasty of the Byzantine Empire, and, as said, according to some scholars, also the Macedonian Dynasty of the same Empire.
After the fall of the Byzantine Empire, still keeping as base the Mount Lebanon for the geographically and strategically position, one of the legitimate descendants of the Royal Family were known as the Christian Sheiks Chemor living in Akoura (Byblos District, presently Lebanon) in 1211A.D. and ruling as sovereigns the region of Zawiya from 1641 to 1747.
Based on the reputation of the greatest Arab historian of the 17th Century, the Patriarch Estephan El Douaihy (1630-1704), the Sheiks Chemor were related by marriage to the Hashemites (El-Hashem) of Akoura. Therefore, they are related to the Royal Family of Jordan, who are linked directly with the Prophet Mohammad, founder of Islam. In 1757, Sheik Antoun took his father’s (Sheik Gharios Chemor) first name as his family name, so, changing from “Chemor” to “Gharios”. Suffering from persecution from the Muslims since the 7th Century, the Family found it impossible to bear the situation in the 19th Century with the tyranny of the Ottoman Empire forcing many members to flee to other continents. That was when Sheik Fares Mansour Gharios arrived in Brazil and registered as “Feres Mansur Guérios” as the native clerks used to write whatever they understood from the foreign names. Prince Mauricio is great grandson of Sheik Fares by male direct line.
Therefore, the Gharios-Ghassan Dynasty descends from the Kings of Sheba from Yemen, the Ghassanid Kings, the Nikephoros Dynasty of the Byzantine Empire, the Macedonian Dynasty of the Byzantine Empire and the Sovereign Christian Sheiks Chemor of Mount Lebanon.
Royal Claims
The Gharios-Ghassan Dynasty has 3 (three) sovereign claims:
- The Ghassanid Kingdom
- The Byzantine Empire
- The Sheiks Chemor State
The Laws of Succession
The Ghassanid hereditary succession was similar to what we see in the Middle Eastern monarchies today. The only mandatory law is that the sovereign has to be a male descendant of the last ruling monarch. There’s no “hermetic” Salic Law (or Agnatic Succession, which is the limitation of inheritance to a throne or fief to heirs descended from the original titleholder through males only, excluding descendants through females) and definitely no “Semi-Salic Law” "(or Agnatic primogeniture", also "patrilineal primogeniture" which is inheritance according to seniority of birth among the sons of a monarch or head of a family, with sons and their male issues inheriting before brothers and their issues, and male-line males inheriting before females of the male line).
Since the time of the ancient Arab tribes, we see a system called “rotation”, which is closer with what we call “Agnatic seniority”, but not in its pure form. "Agnatic seniority” (in its pure form) is a patrilineal principle of inheritance where the order of succession to the throne has preference for the monarch's younger brother over the monarch's own sons. A monarch's children (the next generation) succeed only after the males of the elder generation have all been exhausted. Agnatic seniority essentially excludes females of the dynasty and their descendants from the succession.
Usually, the heir to the throne was selected from among the King’s male descendants for his qualities, such as: physical force, nobility (if the prince was descended from another Royal line from his mother, it would make him more fit for the throne – even the King’s direct sons could come from different mothers) and also the most intelligent and popular among the people.
In succession based on “rotation” (close to seniority), all (male) members of the dynasty are entitled to the monarchy.
The great majority of the Arab Monarchies, past and present, follows the “rotation” close to seniority. Good and recent examples are: the Kingdom of Jordan, the Emirate of Kuwait, the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, the State of Qatar, the United Arab Emirates, and the Sultanate of Oman.
The Ghassanid Kings had also followed the “rotation”; therefore, there are no mandatory rules for the present Sovereign but for being a male descendant of the last ruler. That was proven and known by vast and notable literature that the Guérios Family is from the Lebanese Gharios Family, descended from the Sheiks Chemor, the lawful descendants of the Ghassanid Kings and the Byzantine Emperors from the Nikephoros and Macedonian Dynasty.
The Byzantine Empire
The laws of succession in the Byzantine Empire were far more open. They’ have also adopted the “rotation”, but they did not automatically exclude the women.
According to one of the greatest scholars in History and Dynastic Law, Professor Dr. W. Baroni Santos, (Doctor D’Etat – highest academic title in France - In Nobiliary Law by Reims University, France) in his book “Treaty of Heraldry and Nobiliary Law” Page.62:
“IV – Succession System in the Byzantine Law
In the Byzantine Law there wasn’t Salic Law.
If there’s a lack of male heir, is admissible the “Devolution” (legal term that means a right’s transmission) by a female. ‘We have no corroborating elements to prove, for sure, that Eleanor and Anna (or Agnes) were legitimate daughters of Michael, The Epirot. That time, which matters were of secondary importance, once the concubines had the same rights at the Porphyry Palace, identical rights with the natural offspring of the Sovereign.
The legitimate sons had precedence to the throne, but, once extinct the legitimate branch, without any problems, the adoptive or natural sons would succeed. [7 – Here Dr. Baroni Santos Cites Another Scholar: Dr. Renato Michelle Francesco From The Book “Il Angelo Comneno D’empiro E La Sua Discendenza”. F. Ferrari, Rome. 1951 Pg. 29]”
The Dynastic Law
It’s known by pacific international jurisprudence that a Monarch, even deposed, never ends to be Sovereign and this Sovereignty is transmitted to his/her descendants forever, till the end of times.
Professor Dr. W. Baroni Santos in his book “Treaty of Heraldry – Nobility Law” (Vol. I, 5th ed., 1978, p. 197-198) declared:
“The doctrine and jurisprudence have confirmed that the territorial power is not necessary for the exercise of the Dynasty, for they are inserted in the person of the sovereign, which keeps the same after the loss of the throne, passing them regularly to their heirs and successors.
The loss of its territory in no way diminishes its sovereign powers, because these are inherent in the person of the sovereign, transmitting it, perpetually to their descendants.
“…the concept of sovereignty formally implies a power that is absolute, perpetual, indivisible, imprescriptible and inalienable." (Andrew Vincent, Nationalism and Particularity, 2002, p. 17)
A Dynasty never forfeits its rights. Those rights cannot be forfeited. The principle of “juris sanguinis” (right of blood) operates here. As long as there’s blood the right is valid and lawful forever.
Dr. Paulo Bonavides in his book "Political Sciences" (Ciência Política), page 126 declared:
“Sovereignty is one and indivisible, it cannot be delegated, Sovereignty is irrevocable, Sovereignty is perpetual, sovereignty is a supreme power, these are the main points of characterization that made Bodin's sovereignty in the seventeenth century an essential element of State.”
". . . the King does not forfeit the character of royalty merely by the loss of his kingdom. If he is unjustly despoiled of it by a usurper, or by rebels, he still preserves his rights. . . ." (Emerich de Vattel, The Law of Nations, book ii, chapter xii, no. 196)
Archbishop Hyginus E. Cardinale in his book stated:
“A Sovereign in exile and his legitimate successor and Head of the Family continue to enjoy the ‘ius collationis’ [the right to confer and enjoy honours] and therefore may bestow [such] honours in full legitimacy. . . . No authority [no matter what that authority is] can deprive them of the right to confer honours, since this prerogative belongs to them as lawful personal property ‘iure sanguinis’ [by right of blood], and both its possession and exercise are inviolable." (Orders of Knighthood Awards and the Holy See --- A historical, juridical and practical Compendium, Van Duren Publishers, Gerrands Cross, 1983, p. 119)”
A 1949’s Court sentence of the Republican Italy (Pretoria de Vico Del Gargano, Repubblica Italiana sentence number 217/49) corroborates the above mentioned:
"(…) it's irrelevant if that Imperial family is no longer ruling for centuries, because the deposition doesn’t harm the sovereign prerogatives even if the sovereign renounces, spontaneously, to the throne. In substance, in this case, the Sovereign does not cease to be King, even living in exile or in private life , because his prerogatives are, itself, by birth and cannot be extinguished, but remain and may be transmitted in time, from generation to generation."
Professor Emilio Furno, an advocate in the Supreme Court of Appeal, writes as follows ("The Legitimacy of Non-National Orders", Rivista Penale, No.1, January 1961, pp. 46-70):
“There are not a few judgments, civil and criminal, albeit some very recent, all of which tend as a rule to the acceptance of traditional principles re-enunciated not long since. The issue is that of innate nobility - Jure sanguinis - which looks into the prerogatives known as ‘jus majestatis’ (the right to be honored and respected according with your title) and ‘jus honorum’ (the right to award titles, merit and virtue) and which argues that the holder of such prerogatives is a subject of international law with all the logical consequences of that situation. That is to say, a deposed Sovereign may legitimately confer titles of nobility, with or without predicates, and the honorifics which pertain to his heraldic patrimony as head of his dynasty.
The qualities which render a deposed Sovereign a subject of international law are undeniable and in fact constitute an absolute personal right of which the subject may never divest himself and which needs no ratification or recognition on the part of any other authority whatsoever. A reigning Sovereign or Head of State may use the term recognition in order to demonstrate the existence of such a right, but the term would be a mere declaration and not a constitutive act”.
According with Professor Dr. Mario Silvestre de Meroe:
“The Nobiliary law considers irrelevant the lapse of time the last ruler of the royal family remained at the original power. By assuming the supreme office, the king receives the dynastic powers, which fall on his person, producing immediate and perpetual effects.
For example, King Umberto II of Savoy, a nostalgic memory, with the abdication of his father Vittorio Emanuele III, King of Italy , reigned only during the month of May 1946, leaving for exile without a waiver, in reason that the plebiscite deployed in that country, the republican regime. The Italian courts, in repeated decisions, always recognized its right to exercise the prerogatives dynastic king of Italy in exile, not considering any obstacle on the tiny duration of his reign.”
An Italian judge (The United Court of Bari, The Republic of Italy) officially recognized that:
“Among those rights [of a former ruling house inherited by the successors is] the faculty to ennoble, to grant and confirm coats of arms, to bestow titles drawn from places over which their ancestors had exercised their sovereign powers, and also the right to found, re-establish, reform and exercise the Grand Magistracy of the Orders of Chivalry conferred by their family, which may be handed down from father to son as an irrepressible [or unending] birthright." (Sig. Dr. Giovanni de Gioca, March 13, 1952)
Based on the above, and on the fact that the Laws of Succession permit that any male blood descendant is eligible to be the Sovereign (even Prince Mauricio being from a male direct line). Based on the fact that there’s no claim related to the Ghassanid Dynasty for centuries, therefore any attempt to supersede Prince Mauricio’s claim can be appraised by the legal principle of “Laches” (‘Vigilantibus non dormientibus æquitas subvenit’, in other words, “Equity aids the vigilant, not the sleeping ones” - or those who sleep on their rights). "Laches” is derived from the French 'lecher' and is nearly synonymous with negligence.
That principle is applicable just as a tacit abdication from other members of the family regarding the position of Head of the Dynasty. They don’t loose, at all, their princely attributes, since once by “jus sanguinis” (right by blood), they’re perpetual. Hence, in the future, they can compete for the title of Head of Name and Arms of the Dynasty following the “rotation” system of the Laws of Succession.
H.I.R.H. Prince Mauricio Ahnume Guerios manifested publicly and legally his Acts of Restoration in 2009 in two documents both registered in the Brazilian Government under the numbers: 982916 and 983164 (Curitiba, PR, Brazil - 1st Notary Offices of Curitiba), and also in the United States Library of Congress and United States Copyright Office under the number: 1-273039051.
According to the worldwide acclaimed Professor, Diplomat and lawyer Dr. Mário Silvestre de Meroe, author of several works on Dynastic and Nobiliary Law:
"The dynastic entity thus created, through his representative, called the Head of Name and Arms may grant titles and favors to those whom it considers worthy of honor, at its discretion and is not subject to any limitation in time (several people can bestow the same generation), or in relation to the amount of titles of nobility.
… The well established dynastic entity is endowed with perpetual, irrevocable and irreversible, in accordance with accepted doctrine, historical examples and case nobility. Once created, the dynastic entity separated from the dynastic heritage of its creator and acquires independent existence, with historical attributes of sovereignty, recognized the dynastic houses in exile."
References
- Zahran, Yasmine (2007); Ghassan Resurrected
- Khoury, Aghnatios (1950) The Sheiks Chemors
- Maine, Henry Sumner (1891). Dissertations on Early Law and Custom
- El Duahy, Estephen (1600); Tarikh Al Azminah
- Baroni Santos, Waldemar (1978); Tratado de Heraldica – Direito Nobiliário V.I
- Baroni Santos, Waldemar (1990); Tratado de Heraldica – Direito Nobiliário V.II
- Baroni Santos, Waldemar (2004); Tratado de Heraldica – Direito Nobiliário V. III
- Baroni Santos, Waldemar (2007); Tratado de Heraldica – Direito Nobiliário V. IV
- De Meroe, Mario (1997); Estudos sobre Direito Nobiliario
- De Meroe, Mario (2001); Tradições Nobiliárias Internacionais
- Vattel, Emmerich (1883); The Law of Nations
- Michelle Francesco, Renato (1951); “Il Angelo Comneno D’empiro e La Sua Discendenza”
- Vincent, Andrew (2002); Nationalism and Particularity
- Bonavides, Paulo ;"Political Sciences" (Ciência Política)
- Cardinale,Hyginus E. (1983); Orders of Knighthood Awards and the Holy See --- A his
Att.,
H.I.R.H. Prince Maurício Ahnume Guérios, Dr. PhD.
(Emir Moussa Al-Nu'man Gharios Sheik Chemor, Malik Al-Ghassani)
guerios@gmail.com
www.princemauricio.com
www.ghassanroyalhouse.org
www.mauricioguerios.com
www.oprincipe.com
"May God grant us the wisdom to discover right, the will to choose it, and the strength to make it endure."
DISCLAIMER: The information in this message is confidential and may be legally privileged. It is intended solely for the addressee. Access to this message by anyone else is unauthorised. If you are not the intended recipient, any disclosure, copying, or distribution of the message, or any action or omission taken by you in reliance on it, is prohibited and may be unlawful. Please immediately contact the sender if you have received this message in error. Internet communications are not secure. and Mr. Ahnume Guerios is not responsible for their abuse by third parties nor for any alteration or corruption in transmission. Thank you.