Legal Expert Answers Key Questions on Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor Arrest
The arrest of Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor has dominated headlines since Thursday morning, with the royal detained on suspicion of misconduct in public office. Legal commentator Joshua Rozenberg provides detailed answers to the most pressing legal questions surrounding this high-profile case.
What Is Misconduct in Public Office?
Rozenberg explains that misconduct in public office is a common law offence, meaning it has not been formally codified by parliament. This charge requires proving that the individual held a public office, wilfully neglected their duties or misconducted themselves, and that this amounted to an abuse of public trust. He notes that while Andrew's role as a trade envoy likely qualifies as a public office, the specifics must be thoroughly examined by investigators.
Current Police Investigation
Officers continued searches at Royal Lodge in Windsor on Friday, with Rozenberg stating they will next sift through "mountains of paperwork" dating back up to 25 years to gather evidence. He emphasizes that criminal charges will only proceed if the Crown Prosecution Service is satisfied with the evidence, a process that could take months due to the complexity of the case.
Released Under Investigation
Andrew has been released under investigation, which means he is free without bail conditions or time limits. Rozenberg interprets this as an indication that the police need significant time to conduct their inquiries, potentially stretching over several months before a decision on evidence sufficiency is made.
Potential Penalties and Proof Challenges
Rozenberg highlights that because misconduct in public office is not statutory, there is no maximum penalty limit; in theory, life imprisonment is possible. However, he cautions that proving this charge is tricky, requiring evidence of wilful misconduct and abuse of public trust. Andrew would likely argue he acted in the UK's best interests, a defence the police must consider.
Royal Appointment and High-Profile Comparisons
Despite being appointed by the Queen, Rozenberg asserts that Andrew's obligations as a trade envoy are those of a public officer, not a royal family member, making no difference legally. He draws parallels to the case of Peter Mandelson, former UK ambassador to the US, who also faces allegations related to Jeffrey Epstein under this offence, noting both are high-profile examples of this complex legal area.
Line of Succession Implications
Some have called for Andrew's removal from the line of succession, but Rozenberg points out this would require consent from all Commonwealth countries, a process that took years when changing rules for female succession. He stresses that such a move is legally intricate and not imminent.
Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor has denied any wrongdoing, while Peter Mandelson did not respond to requests for comment. The investigation continues as legal experts monitor developments closely.
