According to reports published on November 3 and 4, court officials served Andrew with a witness summons requiring him to testify in a High Court fraud trial involving Turkish businessman Selman Turk.

The proceedings concern allegations brought by wealthy Turkish national Nebahat Evyap İşbilen, who claims her former financial adviser misappropriated tens of millions of pounds.

To be clear, no one has accused Andrew of wrongdoing in this case. However, the court expects to examine a £750,000 payment Andrew received in 2019, which reportedly involved claims that the money would help İşbilen obtain a passport.

For a man whose royal connections have repeatedly intersected with questions about money and access, that is a development worth examining.

Why Is Andrew Being Called as a Witness?

Sky News reported that court officials served Andrew with a summons requiring him to testify in the civil fraud proceedings. Andrew is due to give evidence around December 15, either in person or by video link.

On November 4, People provided further details of the underlying dispute. İşbilen alleges that Turk misled her about the destination and purpose of substantial payments, including £750,000 transferred to Andrew in 2019.

İşbilen alleges that Turk persuaded her to transfer £750,000 to Andrew in November 2019 by claiming the payment would help resolve her passport difficulties. However, Turk described the money to her bank as a wedding gift connected to Princess Beatrice. He denies misleading İşbilen and maintains that she arranged the payment voluntarily. Andrew later repaid the £750,000.

The court may also question Andrew about a separate £768,743 payment in January 2020, which Turk describes as a loan connected to Andrew’s Swiss chalet. İşbilen disputes that account.

The court is examining allegations that Turk improperly handled funds entrusted to him by İşbilen. The proceedings involve multiple transactions, including money transferred to people connected with the former Duke of York.

Andrew could help the court establish who arranged the £750,000 payment, why he received it and what everyone involved knew about its purpose.

Those are factual matters for the court. It would be wrong to suggest that receiving a payment automatically establishes knowledge of an alleged fraud.

The Royal Connection Is Impossible to Ignore

What makes this case so intriguing is the recurring relationship between royal status and access to money. Andrew occupied an unusually privileged position for decades.

He represented Britain internationally as a trade envoy, moved within influential business circles and enjoyed connections that ordinary members of the public could never expect to possess.

That does not establish that any particular transaction was improper. But it does explain why a court examining substantial financial transfers might consider his evidence relevant.

And there is something extraordinary about the idea that a former senior royal may now have to answer detailed questions under oath about payments linked to his household. Up to now, Andrew’s public explanations of controversial relationships have largely been delivered through carefully controlled statements or interviews.

Court proceedings operate differently. Witnesses may be questioned about documentary evidence, their recollections and discrepancies between competing accounts. That is precisely why sworn testimony can be so important.

Thames Valley Police are also investigating allegations that Andrew committed misconduct in public office during his time as a UK trade envoy. Officers arrested him in February 2026, questioned him and released him under investigation.

Separately, Police Scotland is examining information concerning Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell’s visits to Balmoral. Neither investigation should be conflated with the İşbilen civil fraud case.

Andrew denies wrongdoing in the ongoing police investigations, and no court has found him guilty of a criminal offence. The fact that he faces such intense scrutiny in several different contexts does not mean the allegations are interchangeable. But it does mean the public is now seeing several aspects of his former royal life examined by institutions outside Buckingham Palace.

Royal Status Should Never Be a Shield From Scrutiny

Andrew’s witness summons is an extraordinary development, with some reports describing it as the first involving a member of the British Royal Family since the nineteenth century, although that historical claim requires qualification.

The last time Andrew faced civil proceedings, Virginia Giuffre accused him of sexual abuse in a US lawsuit. He denied wrongdoing and settled out of court in 2022 for a reported multimillion-pound sum, with Queen Elizabeth II reportedly helping to finance the settlement. Andrew avoided testifying at trial, and Giuffre tragically died by suicide in April 2025.

Now Andrew faces the prospect of answering questions under oath in a separate civil case. It will be interesting to see whether his brother, King Charles, intervenes to assist him, although there is no evidence that he intends to do so.

For a monarchy that has spent years distancing itself from Andrew’s controversies, this case is another reminder that stripping someone of royal titles does not erase the financial relationships established while they enjoyed those privileges.

If Andrew possesses information that could help establish what happened to Nebahat İşbilen’s money, the court deserves to hear it. Royal privilege should never place anyone beyond judicial scrutiny.

Discover more from Feminegra

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.