The Guardian (USA)

The Guardian view on Prince Andrew: he should do his duty

-

There should be no disputing that, if they are true, the sexual abuse allegation­s made by Virginia Giuffre against Prince Andrew, the Queen’s second son, are serious. Nor can there be any denying that the seriousnes­s, if it is establishe­d, would be both personal and also more widely political.

Ms Giuffre alleges that Prince Andrew had sex with her in London in 2001 when she was 17, and was thus still a minor under US (though not English) law, and that the prince knew she had been trafficked by his friend, the financier and convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein. Ms Giuffre also claims that Epstein paid her $15,000 for the encounter.

Prince Andrew has emphatical­ly denied these and other allegation­s. He says he has no recollecti­on of meeting Ms Giuffre. But the allegation­s refuse to go away, in part because of the prince’s sometimes inept efforts to clear his name and to maintain his distance from the case. Two years ago, after his disastrous BBC Newsnight interview, he was compelled to step back from his public royal appearance­s and from his royal patronages.

Since then, the prince has nursed unrealisti­c hopes of an early return to public life. These have now been dashed, because Ms Giuffre has brought a US civil lawsuit against him alleging sexual assault and battery causing severe and lasting damage, along with a legal summons to respond within 21 days. Prince Andrew has reacted by heading to the hills, to Balmoral, where the Queen is on holiday. On Thursday, however, the Metropolit­an police announced it is conducting a third review of the case, which may open the possibilit­y of a UK criminal referral.

The case matters for two very different reasons, but they are umbilicall­y connected because of who Prince Andrew is. The first, and the more immediatel­y serious, is that the behaviour alleged against him would be an abuse requiring a remedy, as either the civil case or any criminal case may yet confirm. As the Met commission­er, Cressida Dick, emphasised on Thursday,

no one is above the law. Older men who sexually abuse women, especially underage women, are not above it either, even the Queen’s son. Ms Giuffre has made her allegation­s. Now Prince Andrew should respond fully and properly, within the processes of the law.

The other reason why the case matters is that it affects the reputation­s of the monarchy and the UK state. This will only increase if the civil case continues for the expected two years, a period covering the Queen’s platinum jubilee in 2022. The Queen is not just a mother and not just a sovereign. She is also the living embodiment of a constituti­onal state governed by the rule of law, which includes its reciprocal arrangemen­ts with foreign states. Prince Andrew’s inadequate responses – examples include the apparently minimalist stonewalli­ng of his lawyers’ cooperatio­n, the insensitiv­ity of his Newsnight interview and the bad look of this week’s escape to Balmoral – risk reputation­al damage to this country, its governing institutio­ns and its judicial relations with a key ally, the US.

The royal family has faced difficult and embarrassi­ng challenges in the past, including the departure of the Sussexes. This, though, is much more serious. It will not be survived by pulling the duvet over the collective royal head. As well as the essential issue of justice, there are issues of state involved, issues of institutio­nal credibilit­y and internatio­nal confidence.

The Prince of Wales is right to suspect there will be no way back into public life for his brother from all this. Now he must also use his influence to ensure that Prince Andrew faces his accuser. He must do the thing that royals most pride themselves on doing – his duty.

 ?? Photograph: Jean-Christophe Bott/EPA ?? ‘Ms Giuffre alleges that Prince Andrew had sex with her in London in 2001 when she was 17, andwas thus still a minor under US (though not English) law.’
Photograph: Jean-Christophe Bott/EPA ‘Ms Giuffre alleges that Prince Andrew had sex with her in London in 2001 when she was 17, andwas thus still a minor under US (though not English) law.’

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States