In the United Kingdom, even earthquakes occur in moderation. But it is evident that constitutional and centuries-old customs of the country.
In the hours following the release of the king’s brother, answering questions about , there have been many political voices that have begun to openly demand intervention by Parliament. Specifically, to eliminate the former prince from the line of succession.
Keir Starmer’s Labor Government, according to the BBC, is considering the idea of promoting the necessary legislation in Parliament to completely annul the possibility, however remote, of Andrew taking the throne, after several relevant MPs have expressed their intention to support such an initiative. And sources from Buckingham Palace cited by several British media affirm that the Crown would not express any opposition if this legal reform was finally undertaken.
Despite the fact that Andrés continues to occupy number eight on the list of possible heirs. It is almost unthinkable that his accession to the throne would occur, but the very fact that it could happen scandalizes the British. To eliminate this possibility, a specific act of Parliament is necessary, which should also be endorsed by all the countries belonging to the Commonwealth, which have the British monarch as their head of state.
“Clearly, this is a matter that Parliament is going to have to take into consideration at the appropriate time. And it will be the monarchy itself that wants to ensure that there is no possibility of [Andrés] may one day be king,” said Ed Davey, the leader of the Liberal Democrats, the third parliamentary force in the United Kingdom.
The key lies in the expression “the appropriate time.” There is a general consensus on the idea that the British Parliament must finally break conventions and fully address the impact that the Epstein scandal has had on the monarchical institution.
The House of Commons, like the House of Lords, is governed by the uses and customs accumulated and concentrated over the years in the so-called Erskine May, referring to the aristocrat Thomas Erskine May, constitutionalist and secretary of the House of Commons in the mid-19th century, at the heart of the Victorian era. His Treatise on the law, procedures, privileges and usages of Parliament It remains the reference manual.
And until now it was clear that to debate figures of the monarchy in parliament it was necessary to raise a substantive motion, with a specific proposal submitted to debate and vote. Furthermore, the actions discussed had to be related to some ministerial department.
In practice, custom silenced this type of debate, and on more than one occasion the speaker (speaker of the House of Commons) had reprimanded (as happened to the Labor MP Paul Flynn in 2011) or Elizabeth II’s husband, Philip of Edinburgh (the Labor MP John Hynd was reprimanded in 1969 for criticizing him).
Formal investigation
Everything is changing. There is a lowest common denominator between the parties when it comes to demanding that the withdrawal of Andrés from the line of succession be appropriately debated in the House, but some go further and demand a formal investigation into the royal house and its knowledge of Andrés’ alleged misdeeds.
“I think it would be the most decent thing,” said Andrew Bowie, Conservative MP and relevant member of the current leadership of the parliamentary group. “If he is found guilty, Parliament is within its rights to remove him from the line of succession.”
The man who is causing the most stir today on the left of the Labor Party, has been the first to demand the launch of an official investigation into all the questions that Buckingham Palace has yet to resolve regarding Andrés’ years-long relationship with Epstein.
“It is necessary that the legal process [investigaciones de la policía y la Fiscalía] progress, but we also need a complete investigation into certain institutions and public figures, about the commission of possible crimes or about everything that those responsible for those institutions knew, as well as whether it is necessary for other responsible people to fall,” Polanski claimed.
The claim launched by the politicians responds in any case to a majority popular demand. The sociological firm YouGov has just published a survey, in the heat of the situation, showing how 82% of British citizens should be eliminated from the line of succession. Only 6% of those convinced defend that he remains in it.
Ahead of Andrew would be the three sons of the Prince of Wales, William of England (today, the direct heir), his brother Prince Henry (away from the family and residing in the United States) and his two sons.
