Removing Andrew from line of succession could open a dangerous can of worms - Inside the Palace

REMOVING ANDREW FROM LINE OF SUCCESSION COULD OPEN A DANGEROUS CAN OF WORMS

The Government is considering removing Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor from the line of succession after a snap poll suggested a vast majority of the British public wants them to do so.

I’m sure you’ve heard by now, but just in case it passed you by, Mr Mountbatten-Windsor has been arrested on suspicion of misconduct in public office over his alleged links to Jeffrey Epstein.

He has been released under investigation and has not been charged with an offence.

The snap polling by YouGov on Friday found 82 per cent of Britons want the King’s brother removed from the line of succession.

The former prince is currently eighth in line to the throne.

The Government, I understand, will only consider removing Mr Mountbatten-Windsor's birthright once all police enquiries are completed.

Nine UK police forces are currently looking into the Epstein Files released by the US Department of Justice, which Mr Mountbatten-Windsor features in several times - being featured, however, does not imply guilt. Mr Mountbatten-Windsor has consistently and strenuously denied any and all wrongdoing.

To be clear, the King does not have the power to remove Mr Mountbatten-Windsor's birthright; only an Act of Parliament can do this and - to complicate things further - would require the consent of the other fourteen nations King Charles III reigns over.

If other realms and territories are asked to pass almost identical legislation to remove Mr Mountbatten-Windsor from the line of succession, there is a real risk that Pandora's Box will be opened.

For example, we know Jamaica, and other Caribbean realms where King Charles reigns as Head of State have voiced republican desires.

As the royal broadcaster and historian Rafe Heydel-Mankoo points out, some former colonies "could require reparations as a condition for agreeing to the change."

In any case, the historic move would require Members of Parliament to vote through legislation to remove Mr Mountbatten-Windsor's place in the line of succession, something which hasn't happened since the abdication of 1936, which was the biggest crisis the monarchy had faced for decades.

Let’s remember Mr Mountbatten-Windsor hasn’t been found guilty of any crime, so perhaps such a move would be seen as premature.

In the United Kingdom, you are innocent until proven guilty.

Removing a person from the line of succession could also be a dangerous move for the very foundations of Britain’s constitution.

The country is a constitutional monarchy, relying on the predictable stability the system usually brings.

That stability could be under threat if politicians begin choosing who has the right to claim the throne as the United Kingdom’s Head of State.

However, the situation the monarchy finds itself in is unique for modern times.

No senior royal has been arrested since 1647, when King Charles I was arrested by Oliver Cromwell’s forces.

He was executed two years later, the axe swinging down on the monarchy itself temporarily.

Clearly, the country has changed beyond recognition since the English Civil War, but the Royal Family relies on a favourable public mood.

WHAT ABOUT CATHERINE AND WILLIAM?

Conveniently, the Prince and Princess of Wales have been tucked away on the other side of the Sandringham Estate in Norfolk for their children’s half-term break as the fallout from Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor’s arrest continues.

They did not take part in any public engagements this week, so they were spared the prospect of facing journalists’ shouted questions - unlike the King, the Queen, and the Princess Royal.

However, Prince William and Catherine will face the music sooner or later; this crisis will not go away fast.

As Thames Valley Police continue to search Mr Mountbatten-Windsor's former residence, Royal Lodge, eight other UK police forces are combing through the Epstein Files, or speaking to potential witnesses.

On the one hand, the Prince and Princess of Wales would likely echo the words of King Charles: "My family and I will continue in our duty and service to you all."

The day before the royal arrest, William was highlighting the importance of looking after men's mental health - the biggest killer of men under the age of 50 is suicide.

The latest Ipsos polling, conducted before Mr Mountbatten-Windsor's arrest but after revelations in the Epstein files, shows just 28 per cent of the British public think the Royal Family has handled Mr Mountbatten-Windsor's situation well.

The Prince and Princess of Wales's popularity is down by a dramatic eight and seven points respectively.

As future King and Queen, this will be a huge concern.

However, William is not the King and looked visibly uncomfortable in front of television cameras outside the Duchess of Kent's funeral last year, when Mr Mountbatten-Windsor tried to start a conversation with him.

He clearly knew the optics and refused to engage - perhaps wise.

I suspect, when the time comes, Prince William will take an even further stance than his father on Mr Mountbatten-Windsor.

In fairness to the King, he wasn't monarch when Mr Mountbatten-Windsor was UK Trade Envoy; police are investigating whether he passed on confidential information to Jeffrey Epstein.

In fact, the Telegraph reports Charles was actively against the idea of Queen Elizabeth II appointing him in the first place.

All families have their problems, but Prince William in particular has a big task ahead to convince the younger generation that the monarchy is worth keeping.