2.1.1 – The nature of the UK Constitution
In a dramatic development last week, Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor was arrested and taken into police custody for questioning on suspicion of Misconduct in Public Office. He is believed to be the first member of the Royal Family to be arrested since Charles I was taken into custody by Parliamentary forces in 1646 during the English Civil War. The decision to arrest is legally significant. Under the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984, arrest requires not only reasonable suspicion but also necessity. In many cases, suspects are invited to attend a voluntary interview rather than facing arrest. In this instance, the police clearly considered the necessity threshold met.
Constitutionally, it is entirely proper for a member of the Royal Family – other than the Monarch – to be arrested. Indeed, it illustrates a central pillar of the rule of law, famously articulated by A. V. Dicey in Introduction to the Study of the Law of the Constitution (1885):
- The supremacy of regular law, not arbitrary power
- Equality before the law
- Government limited by established law
The arrest of Andrew – formerly a Prince of the realm, still a Counsellor of State, and eighth in line to the throne – underscores the principle of equality before the law. This was reinforced in a statement issued by King Charles III in which he said “…Let me state clearly: the law must take its course.”
Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor has previously denied wrongdoing in relation to Jeffrey Epstein and has made no public comment on the present allegations. He was released on the same day and remains under active police investigation. It will be a decision of the Crown Prosecution Service as to whether to charge him with an alleged offence.