Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor remains on a secret Government list of royals earmarked for a high-profile ceremonial funeral, despite being stripped of his titles over his links to Jeffrey Epstein, it has been reported.

He was later required to give up his Royal Lodge home in Windsor for a farmhouse on King Charles’s private Sandringham Estate.

The Mail on Sunday reported that senior Whitehall sources had confirmed the funeral arrangement, which forms part of the Cabinet Office’s long-standing “bridge” planning process for royal funerals.

The disclosure has reignited criticism from Epstein’s victims and their lawyers, as well as from several MPs, who argue Mountbatten-Windsor should be treated as a private citizen in death as he now is in life.

What is the ‘bridge’ funeral plan?

The Cabinet Office maintains detailed funeral blueprints for senior royals years in advance, known internally by bridge codenames. Queen Elizabeth II’s funeral followed the plan known as Operation London Bridge, while Prince Philip’s was Operation Forth Bridge.

According to the Whitehall sources, Mountbatten-Windsor, 66, still sits on this list despite the loss of his titles although his own would not be a state funeral, like his mother’s.

What would be included in the funeral?

The precise contents of the plan are not known, but royal commentators cited by the newspaper believe a service could be held at St George’s Chapel in Windsor Castle, the venue used for the funerals of Queen Elizabeth and Prince Philip, although this could be changed.

Mountbatten-Windsor may then be buried at the Royal Burial Ground at Frogmore, where Edward VIII, who abdicated in 1936, is also interred.

For the funeral of Princess Margaret in 2002, the sister of Queen Elizabeth II, there was a private service at St George’s Chapel attended by 400 people, six days of mourning, and a public procession through Windsor before her cremation at Slough Crematorium.

While it is unclear if Andrew’s would be similar, Margaret’s funeral was not an official state or public occasion, meaning it did not carry the automatic taxpayer funding attached to a state funeral. However, it was still accompanied by a costly policing and security operation, which would be contributed to by the public, according to The Mail on Sunday.

While Andrew’s funeral would not receive full state funding, it might still requiring a policing operation met from the public purse.

One unresolved detail is who would serve as pallbearers, a role traditionally filled by regiments linked to the royal in question. Mountbatten-Windsor lost his honorary military titles over the Epstein scandal.

Who could change the plan?

Shadow Home Office minister Alicia Kearns told the The Mail on Sunday there were “no circumstances” under which Mountbatten-Windsor should be afforded a royal funeral, and called for “all such plans” to be “revoked immediately”.

Conservative MP Joe Robertson made a similar call, arguing that as an “ordinary citizen” who has lost his titles and public roles, Mountbatten-Windsor’s funeral “should be paid for privately just like everyone else”.

Because the plan sits within the Cabinet Office’s ongoing review process, any change would need to come from within government, potentially echoing the process by which King Charles removed his brother’s titles last year.

Charles. as the reigning monarch, could decide to strip any ceremonial or royal elements of the funeral.

Both the Cabinet Office and Buckingham Palace declined to comment when approached by The Mail on Sunday.

What do Epstein’s victims’ say?

Gloria Allred, the US lawyer who has represented 27 of Epstein’s victims, told the paper that Mountbatten-Windsor had “brought disgrace upon the Royal Family and the UK” and questioned why taxpayers should fund part his funeral.

Spencer Kuvin, another US lawyer who represented nine of Epstein’s victims, said public money “should not ever” be used to benefit the former prince in death, calling the prospect “an embarrassment to the Crown”.

Norman Baker, a former Liberal Democrat minister in the Coalition government, and a royal finances expert, said the arrangement “must be an oversight”, arguing that as a commoner Mountbatten-Windsor should not receive any form of royal funeral.

Mountbatten-Windsor’s representatives were approached for comment.