En Passant.. What is the Ruling on this?

Once a pawn reaches the 6 th line it has the right for an en passant rule

But if after declining to action it on the right side

Does this pawn then  lose the right to  action it on the left side.

In other words use it or lose it. 

Other pawns still have the right for en passant but I believe you should lose that right if you forfeit it

Is there a clear ruling in the laws of chess on this? 

Don't worry, aflfooty, the option, whether you use it or lose, will never create enzymes.

Lol Ken.... 

I always believe in use it or lose it in life and love

But it appears in chess you can lose it and somehow use it again... Big lol

Thanks deaf_blue_bottles.

I suspect it was one of the last major changes in the 16th century during the  ruy Lopez era.... apart from modern day  minor ones

If you can en passant both sides the pawn is double the potency on the 6th line

the desire to stop freedom of speech these days should scare people . the gov will not have to take that right away we are handing it over. you gotta be so sound asleep not to realize that a stomping out of freedom of speech is a stomping out of freedom of thought
what this is going to give us is already manifesting and no not one of us will like.
its literally evil

I am not a fan of it because I like an ultra defensive style like the Russians of the 70s. Advancing the pawn to the 6th line is advantage enough. En passant makes it a very potent move on Both flanks which seems unfair on the defender lines

One flank should be plenty

If you use it great. But if you don't then the other side pawn should have the right to advance two. 

Anyway, I accept that it's both sides if that the rule I guess 

Ah. Yes... Indeed

It is the 5th rank, my apologies. 

But at least I know someone was following my logic..... Or illogic

En passant captures are only available on the move immediately following a 2-4 or 7-5 pawn move. On later moves it may only be captured normally.

The FIDE laws of chess are online: https://www.fide.com/FIDE/handbook/LawsOfChess.pdf

3.7 (d):

A pawn attacking a square crossed by an opponent’s pawn which has advanced two squares in one move from its original square may capture this opponent’s pawn as though the latter had been moved only one square. This capture is only legal on the move following this advance and is called an ‘en passant’ capture.

Thanks Skelos for that ruling. Clearly it was introduced after the pawn was allowed to advance two instead of one  and unfair positions arose as a result of that rule change.

I just questioned that you could decline en passant  on one side and the same pawn could then accept it on the other.

My wife changes her mind so I understand the ruling now. Just joking.. 

The pawn retains the ability to capture en passant to either side, if it declines the right capture, it can make the left capture later in the game.

Thank you.

It's not a trick question .... but it has stumped a few.

Question: "Does a pawn lose it's right to capture en passant after it declines to make a capture on it's 1st move?

Answer: No. It loses the right to capture the pawn that moved, but the pawn retains it's right to capture en passant,  if the pawn on the other side moves by.

@MustangMate, I think that is a confusing way to explain things. People do get confused by this stuff, and the less-than-ideal FIDE wording doesn't help.

The "next move capture" is I think better considered an attribute of the pawn that moved two squares, and not something tied to the pawn(s) on adjacent files. x2-x4 (any file) and a pawn may capture on x3 on the opponent's next move, if there's a suitable pawn. (Reverse for black: rank 7 to rank 5 of course.)

On later moves the pawn is "safe" on the 4th or 5th rank from en-passant capture.

The castling move is where I questioned en passant

If you move the King to the left and then back to its original position you then lose the right to Castle.. But the position is identical for castling. Use it or lose it. Using 2 moves to shift the king back and forward it is enough punishment

If you move your king 5 places and then bring it back to the castling position, how does the chess algorithm remember that you lost your castling option. Use it or lose it I'm assuming

I suggest that if you can bring either rook and the king to the original castling position then you should be able to Castle again if you don't lose the right to do it. Just like the en passant example where you don't lose the right after triggering an en passant

And rejecting it

They don't either.