City of London's 'Disappointing' Reliance on Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor in Freedom Row
The City of London Corporation's decision to write to Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor, requesting he give up his Freedom of the City, has been labeled as 'disappointing' by a former British diplomat, due to its dependence on the cooperation of the disgraced former prince. This move comes after months of internal debate and public scrutiny over the honour's status.
Background and Controversy
Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor received the Freedom of the City of London in 2012 through patrimony, inheriting it from his father, Prince Philip, who was a Freeman. While largely ceremonial today, the Freedom continues to be awarded regularly to notable figures, such as comedian Sir Lenny Henry and actress Cate Blanchett. However, Mr. Mountbatten-Windsor's association with the honour has become contentious following his stripping of royal titles, styles, and honours by King Charles last year, amid revelations about his relationship with paedophile financier Jeffrey Epstein.
In February, he was arrested on suspicion of misconduct in public office, accused of sharing sensitive information with Epstein during his tenure as the UK's trade envoy. Released under investigation after 11 hours in custody, he has denied any wrongdoing. These events have intensified pressure on the City of London Corporation to address his Freedom status.
Corporation's Response and Criticisms
Initially, the Corporation concluded it could not legally remove the honour, a position described as 'unattainable' by senior councillor Alderwoman Martha Grekos. In response, a group of City of London guides, including former diplomat Lisa Honan CBE, proposed alternative methods for revocation. At a recent Policy and Resources Committee meeting, members agreed in private to write to Mr. Mountbatten-Windsor, inviting him to formally relinquish the Freedom.
Lisa Honan expressed mixed feelings: 'I'm encouraged that the City recognises the need for action in this case. It is disappointing, however, that any action appears to depend on Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor himself.' She highlighted a lack of clear procedures for reviewing and revoking the Freedom across different grant methods, pointing to reputational controversies among other holders without apparent action.
Legal and Procedural Challenges
A Corporation spokesperson explained that Freedom via patrimony constitutes a legal right, not endorsed by elected members, with no effective mechanism for removal. The decision to write to Mr. Mountbatten-Windsor was a step forward, but any response will be considered at a future meeting. Alderwoman Grekos welcomed the change but questioned the delay: 'The Corporation is at last changing the untenable position... Its present approach will hopefully work, but questions remain about why it took so long.'
This case underscores broader issues in the City's governance, with concerns about consistency and transparency in handling honours. As the situation develops, stakeholders will monitor closely to ensure it does not fade into obscurity, akin to other unresolved matters at the Guildhall.
