British govt mulls Andrew’s removal from Line of Succession: What happens if it does

ALSO READ | ‘Everything needs to align’: How Reuters captured the photo of former Prince Andrew leaving custody

Where Does Andrew Stand Right Now?

Despite being arrested on suspicion of misconduct in public office and questioned for 11 hours by detectives from Thames Valley Police, Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor has not been charged with any crime. Police are investigating whether the former Prince passed sensitive government information to Jeffrey Epstein during his decade-long tenure as a UK trade envoy, a role that ended in 2011.

Newspapers in the UK carry the story of Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor being arrested (AP Photo).

He sits eighth in the line of succession, behind Prince William and his three children — George, Charlotte and Louis — and then Prince Harry and his two children, Archie and Lilibet. In practical terms, the odds of Andrew ever ascending to the throne are extremely small. But that hasn’t stopped a groundswell of public and political opinion demanding his formal removal. A YouGov snap poll of 7,200 British adults found that 82 per cent believe he should be removed from the line of succession.

ALSO READ | Andrew-Epstein links were known for years. Then why was King Charles’ brother arrested only now?

Crucially, Andrew is also still technically a counsellor of state — part of the group of senior royals who could theoretically stand in for King Charles if the monarch were ill or abroad. In practice, only working royals fulfil that role, making his inclusion largely ceremonial. But symbolism, in British Royalty, carries real weight.

Why is Andrew not a ‘Prince’ anymore?

Andrew, formerly the Duke of York, is no longer considered a “Prince” or a working royal due to his links to Epstein and serious sexual abuse allegations, which led to a 2022 civil lawsuit settlement. Eventually, King Charles III stripped him of his titles to protect the monarchy’s reputation. But he remained eighth in the line of succession and his daughters, Eugenie and Beatrice, retained their titles as ‘Princesses’.

ALSO READ | Former British Prince Andrew ‘released under investigation’ after arrest on suspicion of misconduct over links to Epstein

How can Andrew be removed from the line of succession?

This is where things get constitutionally complicated. Removing someone from the line of succession is not something a king can do by royal decree, nor something the government can achieve through a quiet administrative measure. It requires an Act of Parliament.

And not just the British Parliament. Because King Charles is the head of state in 14 other countries — including Canada and Australia — any change to the line of succession would also require consultation and formal agreement with the parliaments of each of those realms. That’s a lengthy, politically complex process that involves sovereign nations being asked to align their own legislation with Westminster’s.

However, that there are firm government plans for this to happen once any police investigation is over, as per a report by The Guardian. It is important to note that Andrew hasn’t been found guilty of any crime nor has he been charged with anything. Thus, the Parliament is likely to act, if at all, only after the police investigation ends.

When was the last time a royal removed from the line of succession?

As per BBC, the last time someone from British royal family was removed from the line of succession was in 1936. Edward VIII abdicated the throne to marry the woman he loved, Wallis Simpson, a divorcee, and gave up the claim of his descendants to the throne.

What happens if Andrew is removed from the line of succession?

In practice, removing Andrew from the line of succession changes very little about the mechanics of royal succession. The seven people ahead of him simply continue in their places. His removal would, however, strip him of his Counsellor of State status — a tidying up that many constitutional experts see as long overdue.

Having him formally out of the picture, even if he was almost never going to be king anyway, carries a message about the standards the institution demands. What it cannot do, of course, is undo the damage already done — to the monarchy’s reputation, to the trust of the public, or to a relationship between two brothers that has now, very publicly, landed on opposite sides of a police investigation.

Will his daughters lose their claim to the throne? It would be for the British Parliament to decide this. As per the Royal family’s website, not only does “the Sovereign rule through Parliament, but that the succession to the throne can be regulated by Parliament, and that a Sovereign can be deprived of his/her title through misgovernment”. As per the Act of Settlement (1701), it is for Parliament to determine the title to the throne.