The 'Global Mess' That Means Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor Will Never Be Removed From Royal Family's Line of Succession

Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor astonishingly remains eighth in line to the British throne despite his recent arrest and overwhelming public opposition – and constitutional experts tell OK! removing him would trigger a "global mess" requiring approval across the Commonwealth that makes it highly unlikely he will ever be formally struck from the order of succession.

The former Duke of York, 66, has been released "under investigation" after being seized by cops on his birthday on suspicion of misconduct in public office as part of an investigation linked to his dealings with convicted s-- offender Jeffrey Epstein.

It came as a YouGov poll found 82 percent of Brits believe he should be removed from the line of succession, with just 6 percent saying he should remain.

Senior Conservative MP Andrew Bowie has said it would be "the decent thing" for Andrew to step aside voluntarily, adding: "Of course, if he's found guilty of this, I think Parliament would be well within its rights to act to remove him from the line of succession. But, let's remember, he's not been found guilty of anything just yet – he has yet to be charged with anything."

However, OK! can reveal behind the political noise, constitutional reality is far more complex.

Under the ultra-complex Statute of Westminster 1931, any change to the rules of royal succession must be agreed by all 15 Commonwealth realms where King Charles, 77, is head of state.

It means identical legislation would need to pass not only at Westminster but in Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Jamaica and 11 other independent parliaments.

A constitutional scholar said: "This is not simply a matter of MPs voting in London. It would require coordinated legislative action across multiple sovereign nations. Each realm would need to amend its own laws or constitutional arrangements. That is a time-consuming and politically delicate exercise. Basically, it would trigger a global mess."

A U.K. parliamentary source added: "There is understandable public anger over keeping Andrew in the line of succession, but the mechanics are formidable. You would need political will not just in Britain, but across the Commonwealth, to remove him. Some realms might question why they should devote parliamentary time to an individual so far removed from the reality of him ascending to the throne."

Experts have previously noted altering succession law would require the involvement of the other 14 countries around the world which share the British monarch as their head of state.

It's understood the government has no plans to legislate to change the line of succession.

Liberal Democrat leader Ed Davey said MPs may have to consider the issue "when the time is right" – but stressed: "The most important thing right now is that the police be allowed to get on with their job, acting without fear or favor."

A palace source said: "For now, Andrew remains in the line of succession by operation of law – and disentangling him from it would require not just domestic resolve but a coordinated constitutional effort spanning continents. But his place in the line is far more symbolic than anything attached to reality. It would take huge tragedies to happen to remove those in line ahead of him within Andrew's lifetime to make it a possibility he will ever actually sit on the throne, so discussions about removing him are really null and void."