Unlock the Editor’s Digest for free
Roula Khalaf, Editor of the FT, selects her favourite stories in this weekly newsletter.
When Gary Winnick, a US business magnate, asked Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor in 2013 to join the board of a new charity he was establishing, the then-prince expressed regret that, having sought “higher command authority”, he had been told not to accept the offer.
The email is one of scores in the files released by the US Department of Justice following its investigation of Mountbatten-Windsor’s friend, the child sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, in which King Charles’s brother expressed frustration at the rules he felt were hemming him in.
Yet the challenge for anyone trying to understand the downfall of Mountbatten-Windsor, who was arrested on Thursday on suspicion of misconduct in public office, is that few of the rules governing members of the UK’s royal family are explicit or public. There was never an official announcement setting out the terms under which Mountbatten-Windsor was meant to operate in the role of special representative for UK trade and investment, a post he held from 2001 until 2011.
That opacity has been drawing criticism since at least 2011, when Paul Flynn, then Labour MP for Newport West, criticised the then-prince’s trade role in a parliamentary debate.
Sir Ed Davey, then a Liberal Democrat minister in the coalition government and now party leader, spoke in that debate to defend Mountbatten-Windsor.
However, the release of vast amounts of new information in the DoJ’s Epstein files has brought a new round of calls for transparency. While King Charles last year stripped his brother of his royal titles over his links to Epstein and has said the law should take its course in any prosecution, Buckingham Palace has so far shown no inclination to pursue wider reform.
Professor Robert Hazell, founder of the constitution unit at University College London, said the current arrangements relied on the assumption that every member of the royal family would be a “good chap”.
“I think there does need to be greater clarity, and that probably needs to be expressed in a clearer set of rules,” he said.
Graham Smith, chief executive of anti-monarchy group Republic, pointed out that the royal family had long promised to establish a register of gifts given to members during official visits but had not done so.
“The same rules that apply to government ministers should apply to them,” Smith said.
Mountbatten-Windsor has made no public statement about the revelations from the Epstein files since October. He has consistently denied misconduct either in his sexual behaviour or his business conduct.
Thames Valley Police has said it is assessing information from a US lawyer about a woman claiming to have been trafficked to Windsor in 2010 for “sexual purposes” — for a sexual encounter that the lawyer has said was with Mountbatten-Windsor.
Police were continuing to search Royal Lodge, Mountbatten-Windsor’s former home, on Friday for evidence relating to the misconduct in public office allegations.
In the Epstein files emails, Mountbatten-Windsor made his irritation clear about the rules governing his role.
In his email to Winnick, he wrote: “There is no legal impediment to what you have suggested just a long list of conventions that I am bound by — but am trying to slowly counter.”
He expressed similar sentiments in an August 2010 email exchange congratulating Epstein on his release from house arrest following his 2008 conviction for soliciting sex from a minor.
When Epstein asked how he was, Mountbatten-Windsor replied: “So many opportunities that I am frustratingly not allowed to participate in.”
Hazell said there was a general reluctance among royal families across Europe to be too proscriptive about how senior members could behave. The Crown Princess of Norway, Mette-Marit, has also been embarrassed over her long friendship with Epstein.
Using the French term for archaic laws barring criticism of royals, Hazell said: “There probably is still an underlying feeling that to try to write rules for them is lèse majesté.”
However, there are signs that the scandal around Mountbatten-Windsor might force greater openness.
Dame Margaret Hodge, a Labour peer and former chair of the Commons Public Accounts Committee, said reform to improve transparency would ultimately strengthen the monarchy.
“If you believe in the institution, it becomes even more important that they act with propriety and dignity,” she said.
Meanwhile, Davey, the Liberal Democrat leader, expressed regret at having defended Mountbatten-Windsor in the 2011 debate, in which he stood in for a more senior colleague. He has demanded an inquiry into the handling of the trade representative role and said the Epstein revelations had been “hugely damaging” to trust in the UK’s institutions.
Speaking before Thursday’s arrest, Davey said: “It’s now clear that the trust many of us put in him was not only misplaced but also betrayed.”