The law used to arrest Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor raises important questions: Did the globe-trotting royal family deliberately abuse its position of public trust?
Former Prince Andrew’s arrest and reason
It wasn’t the sexual allegations that ultimately led to Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor’s surprising arrest.
WASHINGTON – The arrest of former British prince Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor on charges of “misconduct in public office” has brought global attention to a vague, powerful and difficult-to-prove British corruption crime.
And the law raises important questions for investigators and prosecutor candidates. The question is whether the royal family, which travels around the world, intentionally abused its position of public trust.
British authorities have said little publicly about the case since Mountbatten-Windsor’s surprise arrest on February 19, which led to an investigation leading up to his release hours later.
British lawmakers and media outlets following the case have linked Mountbatten-Windsor, 66, to allegations that he shared confidential government information with the late disgraced financier Jeffrey Epstein while he was Britain’s special representative for international trade and investment from 2001 to 2011.
British legal experts say the law used to arrest Mountbatten-Windsor is a comprehensive centuries-old common law offense that has been used to prosecute all sorts of serious abuses of public power where modern laws do not fit properly.
There is no equivalent law in the United States regarding “misconduct in public office.” Instead, prosecutors use a narrower toolkit of laws, including provisions regarding “honest services fraud,” depending on the facts of the case.
According to the Institute for Government, the country’s “leading independent think tank aimed at improving government efficiency,” British law could make it a serious crime punishable by up to life in prison, but it usually results in a much lighter sentence.
The institute explains that the crime applies to the abuse or disregard of power or responsibility by a person holding a public office. It says it applies to people in roles across government and the public service, including elected officials, civil servants, police and the judiciary, as well as some other people working in the public service.
Catherine Haddon, the institute’s program director and co-author of the Feb. 5 analysis of the law, said the law also requires getting inside the mind of the alleged perpetrator to prove the case.
And in the case of Mountbatten-Windsor, Haddon told USA TODAY on February 20 that there is also the question of whether the same charges apply to him, given his quasi-official role as trade representative.
Mr Haddon said: “Any trial would need to prove that his role was that of a public servant and that there was misconduct in relation to that role. The criminal guidance in this case also suggests that prosecutions depend on proving that a person was intentionally doing something wrong, knowing it was wrong or being recklessly indifferent to whether it was wrong.”
Mr Haddon said the charge of “misconduct in public office” was known as a “common law crime” in England and Wales. That means Congress doesn’t define it in law, but “it’s been established through decades of court cases,” she said.
But the law has also caused problems over the decades, including how it operates, according to research conducted by the Government Institute and other legal experts from the UK government and private sector.
Now, because of these problems with the law, including the ability to secure convictions under the law, Parliament’s Law Committee in 2020 recommended that the UK government should replace the “Misconduct in Public Office” law with the more appropriate “statutory offenses.”
Mr Haddon said the UK was currently considering just that.
what kind of problem is there ‘Violation of public office law?
The 188-page Law Commission report concluded that the ‘MiPO’ law is ‘one of the most difficult to define offenses in England and Wales’.
The Law Commission’s “Law Reform” report said that investigations into alleged misconduct by public officials, including sting operations, have attracted attention in recent years, raising questions about “the extent to which common law crimes can address modern forms of misconduct”.
The Law Commission found that the use of MiPO crimes has increased in recent decades, exacerbating existing problems with MiPO crimes.
Concerns include a lack of clarity about the terms and extent of the offenses at issue, the risk of abuse and misuse of the offenses “leading to injustice,” its use as a “catch-all” offense in place of more targeted statutory offenses, and concerns that it is “used primarily against junior officials rather than senior decision-makers,” the Government Institute said in a recent analysis.
Former Prince Andrew’s suspicious behavior
Local British authorities at Thames Valley Police arrested Mr Mountbatten-Windsor on suspicion of inappropriately sharing confidential government material with Epstein and others while he was Special Trade Envoy.
Emails included in the latest version of the Epstein documents released by the Justice Department appear to show Mountbatten-Windsor forwarding reports related to official visits and investment opportunities, including those involving Hong Kong, Vietnam, Singapore and Afghanistan.
Authorities stress that Mr Mountbatten-Windsor has not been charged and was released under investigation following questioning.
Mountbatten-Windsor has strongly denied any wrongdoing related to Epstein’s long-standing relationship with his ex-girlfriend and colleague Ghislaine Maxwell, who was convicted of sex trafficking in the United States and is serving a 20-year sentence in prison.
However, in 2022, Prince Andrew also settled a civil lawsuit brought by Virginia Roberts Giuffre, who accused him of sexually abusing her when she was 17 years old.
Importantly, British media, citing sources, said that the current criminal investigation is do not have Focusing on past sexual abuse allegations.
