It was reported yesterday that Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor (formerly known as Prince Andrew) had been arrested on suspicion of misconduct in public office. The arrest has provoked much comment and many questions, such as will he get special treatment, what constitutes misconduct of office, how long might a prosecution take, and will he be removed from the line of succession? Robert Hazell answers some of those questions below.

The arrest of Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor on 19 February led to a deluge of media requests asking about its significance, and the potential impact on the monarchy. Here are the most frequently asked questions, together with some quick answers. 

Is this a crisis for the royal family, and the monarchy? 

Yes, and no. It is a crisis for the family: any family would be devastated when told that a close family member had been arrested for a serious offence.  

But it is not necessarily a crisis for the monarchy as an institution. The public are perfectly capable of distinguishing between their attitude to an individual, and the institution. In January YouGov reported that 90% of Britons had a negative opinion of Mountbatten-Windsor, but that had no knock-on effect on other royals. 60% of people had a positive view of King Charles; and 64% believed Britain should continue to have a monarchy, consistent with the 61-67% who have felt so throughout his reign. 

We must await future opinion polls to see if that is still the case. Attitudes could change if evidence emerges that the Palace has been involved in any kind of cover up. But in the past, the public’s support for the monarchy has remained remarkably high, and stable, despite occasional scandals, like Queen Elizabeth’s annus horribilis in 1992. 

As a former royal Duke, is he entitled to any special treatment with the law? 

No, he is not entitled to any special treatment. He has the same rights and responsibilities as any other citizen. This includes the right to be accompanied by a lawyer at any police interview, and to remain silent if he chooses to do so. 

King Charles has made it clear that the law must take its course, and the Palace stands ready to help the police and other authorities with their enquiries. On 19 February the King issued this statement: 

I have learned with the deepest concern the news about Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor and suspicion of misconduct in public office. What now follows is the full, fair and proper process by which this issue is investigated by the appropriate authorities. In this, as I have said before, they have our full and wholehearted support and co-operation. 

Let me state clearly: the law must take its course.  

Should Mountbatten-Windsor be stripped of his remaining titles? 

As I discussed in a blogpost published in December, although he has been removed from the Roll of the Peerage, Mountbatten-Windsor remains Duke of York, Earl of Inverness and Baron Killyleagh. Legislation would be required to strip him of these remaining titles. The government has promised to introduce legislation to strip Lord (Peter) Mandelson of his peerage: at Prime Minister’s Questions on 4 February Keir Starmer said: ‘I have instructed my team to draft legislation to strip Mandelson of his title, and wider legislation to remove disgraced peers’. We do not yet know the scope of the proposed legislation; but it could be framed to include Andrew. 

Should Mountbatten-Windsor be removed from the line of succession? 

That would require legislation, but it would be far more difficult, because it would require the involvement of the other 14 countries around the world which share the British monarch as their head of state: countries like Australia, Jamaica, Papua New Guinea. The last time this happened was for the Succession to the Crown Act 2013, which made the law of royal succession gender neutral. It took two years of protracted negotiations for all the different countries to amend their own laws or constitutions. With Mountbatten-Windsor being only eighth in line, it seems highly unlikely that the UK government or the other governments will want to expend time removing him from the line of succession. 

Have other royal families had similar difficulties? 

Yes. In Norway, the son of the Crown Princess Marius Borg Høiby is currently standing trial for charges of attempted rape and sexual assault. In Spain, the former King, Juan Carlos, was investigated in 2020 for accepting potential kickbacks on a large contract with Saudi Arabia, and effectively went into exile. The current Spanish King’s brother-in-law Iñaki Urdangarin was sentenced in 2017 to serve six years in prison for fraud, embezzlement and tax evasion. 

When was the last time a British royal was in trouble with the law? 

The reign of Charles I is often mentioned as the last occasion when a senior royal was arrested. That is not strictly true: King Charles surrendered to the Scottish Presbyterian army in 1946 before being delivered to the English parliamentary commissioners in 1947 and subsequently held in captivity.

In 2002 Princess Anne pleaded guilty at Slough magistrates’ court to an offence under the Dangerous Dogs Act, after her bull terrier had bitten two children in Windsor Great Park. She was fined £500 and ordered to pay £250 compensation. 

How long might the police enquiries take? 

The enquiries might take some time. Mountbatten-Windsor was Trade Envoy from 2001 to 2011. Most of the evidence is likely to be documentary, retrieved from hiss emails and the files of agencies like UK Trade and Investment, and government departments like the Department of Trade (now Business and Trade), the Foreign Office, Cabinet Office and Number 10. Government records from that long ago will take time to find and produce.

How long will the Crown Prosecution Service take before deciding whether to prosecute? 

The police will submit all the evidence they have gathered to the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS). The CPS in turn will need time to consider whether there is a sufficient case to prosecute, for a common law offence, the definition of which is not crystal clear (see below). They will also need to liaise closely with the team investigating Lord (Peter) Mandelson, if the police pass a file on him to the CPS, because there will be similarities in the evidential and legal difficulties in proving misconduct in each case. In such high a profile case, they will also want to consult the Director of Public Prosecutions, Stephen Parkinson.

What is misconduct in public office? 

Misconduct in public office is a common law offence, which means it is not derived from an Act of Parliament, and therefore not defined by legislation. The elements of the offence were summarised by the Court of Appeal in 2004. It is committed by:

• A public officer, acting as such, [who] 

• wilfully misconducts himself 

• to such a degree as to abuse the public’s trust in the office holder 

• without reasonable excuse or justification. 

The main difficulties may lie in proving that when acting as Trade Envoy, Mountbatten-Windsor was the holder of a public office; and that his conduct was such as to abuse the public’s trust. On the latter, the Court of Appeal said it must amount to ‘an affront to the standing of the public office held. The threshold is a high one requiring conduct so far below acceptable standards as to amount to an abuse of the public’s trust in the office holder’. 

If he is prosecuted, how long might it take before a trial could take place? 

It could be a very long time before any trial takes place. The Leveson review found a backlog of almost 80,000 cases awaiting trial in the Crown Court last September, and forecast that this would increase to 100,000 cases by November 2027. Some defendants are already being told their cases will not be heard until 2030. Reasons might need to be found for Mountbatten-Windsor’s case to be expedited if it is to jump the queue.  

In addition to this blog, Robert recently published a blogpost on stripping Lord Mandelson of his peerage and has previously written about how Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor might be formally deprived of his titles. 

About the author 

Professor Robert Hazell is the founder of the Constitution Unit and served as Director from 1995 to 2015. 

Featured image: Sandringham House (CC BY 2.0) by John D Fielding.