Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese has formally notified Sir Keir Starmer that his government would support legislation to remove Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor from the royal line of succession, making Australia the first Commonwealth realm to publicly back the move.
In a letter to the UK prime minister, Albanese wrote: “In light of recent events concerning Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor, I am writing to confirm that my Government would agree to any proposal to remove him from the line of royal succession”.
The former prince remains eighth in line to the throne despite being stripped of his titles, including “prince,” in October amid mounting pressure over his ties to convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein. His arrest last week on suspicion of misconduct in public office—allegedly sharing sensitive government documents with Epstein during his time as trade envoy—has intensified calls for his permanent removal from the succession.
‘These Are Grave Allegations’
Albanese’s letter continued: “I agree with His Majesty that the law must now take its full course and there must be a full, fair and proper investigation. These are grave allegations and Australians take them seriously”.
King Charles III, Andrew’s brother, responded to the arrest with a rare personal statement: “What now follows is the full, fair and proper process by which this issue is investigated in the appropriate manner and by the appropriate authorities”.
A spokesman for the UK prime minister confirmed receipt of Albanese’s letter and said the government was “considering whether further steps are required in relation to Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor,” adding they were “not ruling anything out”. However, officials cautioned that “given the ongoing police investigation, it would not be appropriate for the government to comment further at this stage”.
The Constitutional Hurdle
Removing Andrew from the line of succession is not straightforward. It would require an Act of Parliament approved by MPs and peers, receiving royal assent from the King. More critically, because the monarchy is shared equally across 14 independent Commonwealth realms where King Charles is head of state, any change requires the consent of all their parliaments.
Canada, Jamaica, New Zealand, and the other realms where Charles is sovereign would need to pass their own legislation mirroring the UK’s.
Former BBC royal correspondent Jenny Bond told ABC Radio National that while the process is complex, it’s achievable: “It would need the acquiescence of the other 14 realms, obviously… but I don’t think anyone’s going to say no”.
“I mean, quite frankly, if he’s not viewed fit to be prince, who’s going to say he’s fit to be king?” Bond added. “However remote that possibility is—and clearly being eighth in line is very remote indeed. But it would also have the advantage of removing him as counsellor of state”.
Counsellors of state are appointed to act in the monarch’s place if the King cannot undertake official duties due to illness or absence abroad. Until 2022, the next four people in the line of succession over 21 automatically qualified—a provision that would have included Andrew.
A Precedent Nearly 90 Years Old
The last time someone was removed from the line of succession by an Act of Parliament was in 1936, when Edward VIII and his descendants were excluded following his abdication.
The Perth Agreement of 2011—which reformed succession to replace male-preference primogeniture with absolute primogeniture—demonstrated how such multilateral changes can be achieved across the realms. That process took several years and required coordinated legislation in all 16 realms where Elizabeth II was sovereign.
Political Pressure and Public Opinion
Calls for Andrew’s removal have intensified since the release of millions of Epstein-related files by the US Justice Department in January, which detailed communications between the former prince and the late financier.
Last year, some Australian MPs explicitly urged Albanese to support Andrew’s removal. West Australian teal MP Kate Chaney told the Sydney Morning Herald in November: “Given Virginia Giuffre’s personal connections to Australia, Anthony Albanese should be encouraging his mate Keir Starmer to start the natural next step—removing Andrew from the line of succession”.
“No Australian wants any possibility of Andrew being our head of state,” Chaney said.
Public sentiment in Britain is similarly emphatic. A YouGov survey from early January found just 3% of Britons hold a positive view of Andrew—the lowest favourability rating recorded to date.
What Happens Next
The UK government has not yet introduced legislation, and officials stress they are awaiting the outcome of the police investigation. Andrew was arrested at Sandringham on his 66th birthday, questioned for 11 hours, and released under investigation without charge. Police searches at his former Windsor home, Royal Lodge, continued over the weekend.
Defence Minister Luke Pollard told the BBC the move to remove Andrew from succession was the “right thing to do,” regardless of the investigation’s outcome. Chief Secretary to the Treasury James Murray struck a more cautious note, saying “any questions in that sphere would be quite complicated” and the investigation needed to “play out”.
Reform UK leader Nigel Farage cautioned against rushing legislation “until the police have finished their jobs,” warning against a “trial by media”.
Albanese’s letter removes one significant hurdle. But for Andrew to be permanently stripped of his place in the succession—a position he has held since birth—12 other Commonwealth nations must follow Australia’s lead. The investigation continues. The legal process grinds forward. And a former prince who once stood second in line to the throne now waits to learn whether he will be, in the eyes of the law, erased from the line entirely.
