Prince Andrew will retain his Freedom of the City of London honor following a review that concluded the title cannot legally be withdrawn. The distinction remains one of the few formal honors still attached to the King's younger brother, who previously lost several royal titles and patronages after stepping back from public duties amid controversy surrounding his association with the convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein.
The latest review was prompted by extraordinary circumstances. According to reports, Andrew was arrested in February on suspicion of misconduct in public office, with authorities launching an investigation after allegations that sensitive information may have been shared with Epstein during a defined period. Police reportedly held the prince for around eleven hours while conducting searches at properties connected to him, including his residence on the Sandringham Estate in Norfolk and Royal Lodge in Windsor, Berkshire, where he had lived for many years. Against that backdrop, calls to strip the civic honor grew loud, but the law had other ideas.
How The Honor Was Granted In The First Place
The key to the puzzle lies in how Andrew received the Freedom of the City of London in 2012. The award came through a process known as patrimony, a centuries old tradition in which the honor is granted automatically because the recipient's father already held it. In Andrew's case, that lineage traces to his father, Prince Philip, who had been a freeman of the City.
This matters enormously, because the normal path to the Freedom involves a vote. Recipients are typically nominated by members of the City of London Corporation's elected council, and that body can, in principle, reconsider its choices. But when the honor arrives through patrimony, no vote ever took place, and no elected officials were involved in granting it.
The Legal Reason It Cannot Be Revoked
After reviewing the legal framework surrounding the award, the Corporation concluded that titles granted by patrimony cannot be withdrawn. A spokesperson, speaking to the Local Democracy Reporting Service, explained the logic: the honor is treated as a legal entitlement passed down by inheritance rather than a discretionary award. Because applications granted by patrimony are never considered by elected members, there is no formal mechanism to remove them once conferred.
In plain terms, the Corporation never gave Andrew the honor, so the Corporation has no power to take it away. Critics have called this an absurd gap in the rules, and there is speculation that the City may eventually modernize its practices. For now, however, the ruling stands, and no motion or public pressure can change the outcome without new legislation or a fundamental reinterpretation of the tradition.
A Symbolic Honor With Ancient Roots
The Freedom of the City of London is one of the oldest traditions associated with the City and is regarded as the highest civic honor the Corporation can bestow. Historically, it carried real privileges: freemen could trade within the City gates, and some of those medieval rights survive as cherished customs. The most famous is the ability to drive sheep across London Bridge, a right freemen occasionally exercise in ceremonial protests and charity events. Recipients also historically received a red pamphlet of City rules and, in legend at least, the right to be drunk and carried home on a stretcher without arrest, a tale officials enjoy retelling.
Today the honor is mostly ceremonial, conferred on public figures, philanthropists, and leaders who have made notable contributions to public life. That is precisely why the decision to let Andrew keep his has generated frustration: the honor's modern purpose is to recognize exemplary citizenship, not to preserve inherited privileges regardless of conduct. Several council members have publicly voiced disappointment, and petitions have circulated, but the Corporation's legal officers have been firm that sentiment cannot override the mechanism of patrimony.
Historians point out that patrimony itself dates to medieval guild traditions, when sons followed fathers into the freedom of their trade cities. The custom survived because it was rarely controversial; it has simply never before been tested by a recipient whose reputation collapsed so completely after the honor was conferred.
Where Things Stand Now
The review's conclusion means Andrew retains a distinction that has outlasted his military titles, royal patronages, and HRH styling. Whether the City of London will eventually create a mechanism for revoking patrimonial freedoms remains an open question, and some council members have reportedly expressed interest in reform. Legal experts note that any change would need careful drafting to avoid retroactive complications with honours held by thousands of freemen.
For the public, the episode is a fascinating case study in how ceremonial traditions can collide with modern accountability. The Crown can remove a dukedom and a palace can close its doors, but a medieval inheritance rule, it turns out, bows to no committee. Andrew's name will remain on the roll of freemen unless the law itself is rewritten.
