503. Andrew’s Arrest: What Next?

0:00Lord Falconer:Thanks for listening to The Rest is Politics. To support the podcast, listen without the adverts and get early access to episodes and live show tickets, go to therestispolitics.com. That's therestispolitics.com. This episode is powered by Fuse Energy.

0:15Alastair Campbell:Most of us are buying energy in the dark, not knowing what it costs. You wouldn't do that with your weekly food shop, but with energy, you're often charged first and only find out the number later.

0:24Lord Falconer:When you don't have that clarity, you usually end up paying more than you should, which is what Fuse Energy is working to change about how energy works. The average household switching to Fuse can save around£200 on their energy bills. Fuse handles the practical side. The app shows what you're spending day by day and what that actually means for your bills. For listeners to the show, there's an added benefit. Use the code POLITICS when you switch and you'll receive a free TripPlus subscription. Switch to Fuse Energy and save around£200 on your energy bills. Use the code POLITICS for a free trip plus subscription.

0:59Lord Falconer:Fuseenergy.com slash politics.

1:21Alastair Campbell:When you're ready, your new car shows up right at your door. It doesn't get better than that. Buy your car the easy way on Carvana. Delivery fees may apply.

1:32Lord Falconer:I'm R.J. Decker, a private investigator uncovering the sunshine state's darkest secrets. Tuesdays, it's the premiere of ABC's hottest new crime show.

1:42Alastair Campbell:R.J. freaking Decker has that live and breathe. He's a private eye. It's not a standard murder. It's someone bigger. And a public mess.

1:50Lord Falconer:Trying to get sent back to prison today? You go to prison one time and suddenly it's all the jokes.

1:56Alastair Campbell:R.J. Decker, series premiere, Tuesdays on ABC and stream on Hulu.

2:10Lord Falconer:Welcome to an emergency episode of The Rest is Politics with me, Alistair Campbell, and today not with Rory Stewart, who is somewhere on a half-term ski slope with his family, but with a very old friend and colleague of mine, Charlie Faulkner. Lord Faulkner served the Blair government in several roles, and the most important of which for this discussion were Solicitor General, Secretary of State for Justice, and Lord Chancellor, because the reason for this special episode is the huge news, and it is huge around the world, this, I've checked, that Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor, formerly Prince Andrew, has been arrested on the Sandringham estate.

2:45Lord Falconer:He's been taken into custody as his homes are searched, and he's being quizzed in relation to possible misconduct in public office. It's just the latest chapter in a long saga involving Andrew and the child sex trafficker Jeffrey Epstein who ended his own life seven years ago now yet whose impact continues to reverberate in so many ways not least for the survivors of his crimes still seeking justice and should say Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor has repeatedly, consistently denied any wrongdoing. Now, Charlie, first of all, thank you so much for doing this. Thank you. I mean, you're honoured. You've been told me you're honoured.

3:23Lord Falconer:I'm honoured.

3:24Alastair Campbell:I'm privileged. Yes, I'm sorry. I took that as read, really. But could I say how honoured and privileged I am?

3:30Lord Falconer:Excellent. On a scale of one to ten, how gobsmacked were you to hear the news that the king's brother, supposedly the favoured son of the late Queen Elizabeth, is spending his 66th birthday in a police station being grilled about a crime which, if proven, carries with it the prospect of life imprisonment.

3:50Alastair Campbell:Well, absolutely amazed in the context of thinking about this from a sort of distance of a few years, but less and less amazed as two things have been happening. One, the release of information about Epstein from the Epstein files, and as it were, everybody recoiling in horror in what they're reading about a whole range of people. But secondly, the increasing sense that the law enforcement authorities in the UK would be bound to act if the idea that everybody is equal before the law had any meaning. So it became, I think, more and more likely that the normal steps and investigation would take place, not only as against Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor, but also against, for example, Peter Mandelson, who got caught in exactly the same sense that the law enforcement authorities just could not do nothing.

4:46Lord Falconer:What was really interesting and watching the whole thing unfold this morning was these police cars arrive. Now, were there media already there striking out Andrew? Did the police tip them off that they were going to be there? But why was he arrested? Surely at this stage of investigation, wouldn't the normal process be that you'd perhaps make contact with his lawyer and say, would he come in for a conversation or could we set up a meeting or whatever it might be? Why would they go this heavy handed? Is that to show that they're deliberately saying nobody is above the law and we're taking this very seriously?

5:22Alastair Campbell:Well, I mean, I don't know. I couldn't agree more with you that it's quite odd that they arrested. And even if you've got a reasonable suspicion that a serious crime might be committed, You're only allowed under the law to arrest somebody if it's, quote, necessary to do so. And the normal things about necessity are, are you going to flee the country? Are you somebody who might start to damage property? Neither of which I would have thought would be in play here. the normal, as it were, justification given for necessity is, quote, to allow prompt and effective investigation. So the effect of arresting Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor was, first of all, it means that the police can ask him questions, because if you're not arrested, you don't need to stay in a police station to be asked questions.

6:18Alastair Campbell:And secondly, it allows them to take away from his home or anywhere else that he occupies, or on his own person, evidence that might be relevant to their investigation, for example, mobile telephones or computers. You would very frequently arrest somebody who's not a flight risk or anything like that, because you want, without them having the chance to, as it were, prepare themselves properly, ask them lots of questions.

6:45Lord Falconer:Now, we understand, and we don't know that much. There's wall-to-wall discussion and debate about this, but we understand this relates to his time as UK Special Representative for International Trade and Investment, UK Trade Envoy, which was a position that he had for about a decade, starting when we were part of the government. So it's not, so far as we know at this stage, about allegations of the sexual abuse for which Epstein has been convicted. He was in prison, as we all know, when he ended his own life. Tell me about the charge misconduct in public office. Whenever I hear that phrase, I don't know why, but Boris Johnson comes into my head.

7:27Lord Falconer:But of course, he seems to have got away with quite a lot of stuff so far. What do you have to prove to establish that a crime has been committed related to misconduct in public office?

7:37Alastair Campbell:Well, first of all, you've got to be a public official of some sort. And the most common charges are often against police officers. Okay. And if you're a member of the royal family, I don't think you would be a public official for the purposes of this crime. I think that misconduct in public office means you've been appointed to a public office. And I think the courts would say a public official does not include simply being a member of the royal family, because it's very, very difficult to identify what the role involves. How would you judge abusing that position? I just don't think it was intended to apply to that.

8:13Alastair Campbell:It's intended to apply to somebody who holds a public office like UK Trade Envoy, which he was for 10 years, as you've said. And then the elements of the crime are deliberately misperforming that office in some way. And the classic example is a police officer who uses his position as a police officer to access, for example, criminal records for his own personal use to give to his friends or to damage his enemies. Secondly, the abuse has got to be so significant that it reduces the standing of the person in public reputation. There's got to be no reasonable justification for it. and it's got to be done deliberately.

9:01Alastair Campbell:You've got to know when you're doing it that you shouldn't be doing it. It's got to be so awful as to make everybody in the public, not everybody, but reasonable people, think this really is an abuse of your office and you've got to have no reasonable excuse for it.

9:17Lord Falconer:That sounds to me like quite a high bar.

9:19Alastair Campbell:It is quite a high bar. And the sorts of examples that are given are the police officer who accesses criminal records, There's a case of a police officer investigating a crime who sexually hits upon a vulnerable witness, abusing his position as a police officer. Another example, not in more recent memory, but earlier, a MP who fiddled his expenses. That was said to be misconduct in public office. So the elements here would be said to be, and I'm not saying this is right or wrong, you've got this job as a UK trade envoy, your job is to promote UK trade for the country. If, and it's a very big if, if instead of that you used the job for your own interests flagrantly, that would be misconduct in public office.

10:16Lord Falconer:And the other part that you mentioned there, which I think makes this a difficult bar, is when we talk about abusing the public's trust. The issue of reputation, particularly at the moment with the reputation of politics as it is, the reputation of public life, that sounds to me quite a woolly thing. Again, quite a difficult bar to cross. And this is unprecedented because, so far as I can remember, have we ever had a royal arrested like this before?

10:43Alastair Campbell:Well, in modern times, no royal has ever been arrested. The example that everybody's citing is Charles I. But what happened to Charles I was that he lost a civil war. And the winners, the parliamentarians, then took him prisoner, like a prisoner of war. And he remained a prisoner of war until he was then charged with high treason and executed. He was never arrested like this because they were investigating a criminal offence. He was just the loser, as it were, who then paid the price of being the loser. There's never, ever, ever been anything like this in modern times or indeed in pre-modern times when simply what happens to you if you're a royal, you ended up on the wrong end of it.

11:24Alastair Campbell:You ended up being killed or something terrible happening to you, but you weren't being arrested in the context of a rather well-ordered criminal justice system.

11:31Lord Falconer:And I mean, I just wonder whether what's happening here, one is a combination of things. It's the unspeakable nature of Epstein's crimes, which we already knew about. It's the scale of his contacts and networks and operations and the cynicism of those who were involved in a lot of that. You've also had, including I think this morning, he did an interview on the BBC, when you have the Prime Minister saying that anybody who can give evidence in relation to this should do, when you have a former Prime Minister, Gordon Brown, producing evidence based upon his own analysis of both the files and his experience when he was Prime Minister, then I guess in a way the police are being given permission, perhaps to go down rows that in the past they might have been very, very wary of going down.

12:28Alastair Campbell:Is it more than permission? Is the pressure not absolutely immense to do something? And one of the striking, striking, striking things about this, though it may not be that striking, is watching how cases are investigated at the moment. They normally take absolutely forever to get investigated. And if there is any degree of complexity, and there's very considerable complexity in this, you would, and this might be legitimate, expect the police to take months to reach a conclusion about what they're going to do, partly because they want to be on sure ground, and partly because they don't want to make a mistake in relation to it.

13:10Alastair Campbell:The search warrant in relation to Peter Mandelson's premises, the arrest and searches of Prince Andrew's premises, they've all happened at incredible speed, because I am assuming that the starting point for these, or the point that has led to these investigations starting, is the most recent releases of the three million documents in the Epstein case, which is only a month or two away, basically. So I think there's a sense that authorities have to act. So there is enormous pressure on the authorities to act. And they have to be seen to be saying nobody's immune in relation to all of this. And of all the people in all the world who have previously been thought to be immune, it's the royal family.

13:58Alastair Campbell:And so, in a way, Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor is the clearest demonstration that nobody is above the law.

14:06Lord Falconer:Interesting, the King's statement. And the King's statement, we assume that the King and Downing Street, that nobody was tipped off in advance that this was happening. We don't know that, but I think we can assume that.

14:17Alastair Campbell:I mean, watching the television this morning, Buckingham Palace has said the King was not tipped off in advance.

14:22Lord Falconer:So they very quickly, they hear the news the same pretty much as everybody else. Very quickly, they put together a statement in his name. I have learnt so he's very much leaning into owning it with the deepest concern the news about Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor not my brother but Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor and suspicion of misconduct in public office what now follows is the full fair and proper process by which this issue is investigated in the appropriate manner by the appropriate authorities in this as I have said before they have our full and wholehearted support and cooperation let me state clearly the law must take its course.

15:02Lord Falconer:As this process continues, it wouldn't be right for me to comment further. Meanwhile, my family and I will continue in our duty and service to you all, Charles R. And of course, what that's about is actually at a time when something is happening that will inevitably have people saying, this is so bad for the monarchy, this is so terrible for the monarchy, That is him leaning into the sense of the institution is above all this. You're a very effective PR kind of guy, Charlie. You've had lots of experience. Do you think that was an effective piece of communication by his match?

15:40Alastair Campbell:Put aside the question of PR, I thought it was an incredibly impressive statement. I mean, if you look at it, the wording is slightly strange. I just mean syntactically, not in its content. but the content was saying an incredibly important thing, which is my duty comes before my family. And that last bit, when he says we will continue in our duty and service to the nation, is a very striking statement, is it not, of somebody saying my family have to be sacrificed. And that's what he was saying, wasn't it?

16:15Lord Falconer:Yeah, that's exactly what I read when I first heard it. And I agree with you. I think it was a very deliberate emphasis upon the institution being more powerful than anybody who's within it. But I do think as a piece of public relations, you say it's an impressive statement, and I get that. But actually, I think what they have to do, because I mean, maybe we should talk a little bit about whether we do think there's long term impact upon the monarchy. In a way, they have to cauterize this. They have to see Andrew. That's why he's been expelled. That's why he's lost his titles. That's why he's lost the name.

16:49Lord Falconer:but I think you could make the case that this has been coming for some time have they have they felt that maybe they are in a more more open to the sort of impunity that quite a lot of leading politicians around the world feel they can enjoy at the moment have the royals felt that maybe

17:08Alastair Campbell:they're in that space I don't know the change for them must in part be the much greater visibility about things that Andrew did. It's not possible just to say, no, no, no, we're not going to comment on any of this over a period of time. I'm not saying that was their position, but all this information that's pouring out makes it incredibly difficult for them. I think this is immensely damaging for the royal family. I think that King Charles has behaved very well in relation to trying to deal with it. And I treat the statement he's made as completely genuine. But if your whole pitch is you're a royal family who gives an object lesson to the country, well, the fact that the police are now investigating Prince Andrew on abuse in public office indicates there's reasonable grounds to believe that he may have committed that crime.