Diaries renew debate about monarchy's role

[Neil D]

Friday 24 February 2006

By Jill Lawless

London - As an exercise in protecting royal privacy, Prince Charles' court case has been a flop.

The heir to the throne went to court to stop a newspaper publishing diaries he kept during trips abroad. Instead, a judge told lawyers to release the full text of a 1997 journal that revealed the prince's dislike of the Chinese leadership, his view of US and British politicians and his chagrin at being downgraded to business class on a plane.

"It puzzled me as to why the seat seemed so uncomfortable," the prince wrote.

Breach of confidentiality

More embarrassing revelations could be on the way if a High Court judge rejects the prince's claim for breaches of confidentiality and copyright. Judge William Blackburne said on Thursday he would give his ruling at a later date but it would be "as soon as possible".

Publication of the prince's sometimes curmudgeonly political opinions - and the claim by a former aide that Charles often writes to politicians to express his "dissident" views - have also raised questions about the role of the monarchy in 21st-century Britain.

Prime Minister Tony Blair said on Thursday that the prince was "perfectly entitled to express his views". But critics of the monarchy said Charles - often portrayed as a well-meaning but out-of-touch duffer in search of a role in life - had gone too far.

"We only tolerate a monarchy in this country because the monarch should be neutral in political matters and should stay out of them," said Stephen Haseler, professor of politics at London Metropolitan University and chairperson of the anti-monarchist group Republic.

Charles, 57, is suing the publisher of the Mail on Sunday newspaper, which in November published portions of a diary kept during a 1997 trip to mark the handover of the British colony of Hong Kong to China. The prince's lawyers say the document, intended for distribution to a few close friends, was leaked by a former palace employee. They are claiming invasion of privacy and copyright infringement, and seeking to stop the newspaper publishing seven similar journals from other royal trips.

'The monarch should be neutral'

The Mail contends that publishing the diaries was in the public interest because they reveal the political beliefs of the man in line to be Britain's head of state.

Members of the British royal family traditionally keep their political views to themselves. Charles, however, has cast himself as an advocate for heritage, tradition and the environment. In speeches he has backed alternative medicine, condemned genetically modified food, grumped about modern education, called for action on global warming and referred to some modern architecture as "a monstrous carbuncle."

Britons haven't been grateful for his efforts, he complained to a US interviewer in October: "I only hope that when I'm dead and gone, they might appreciate it a little bit more."

In a witness statement released in court Tuesday, the prince's former private secretary, Mark Bolland, said Charles considered himself a "political dissident" who frequently wrote letters to ministers expressing his views.

Bolland acknowledged that the prince's behavior was "constitutionally controversial."

The prince's current private secretary, Sir Michael Peat, stressed that Charles "avoids making public statements on matters which are the subject of disagreement between political parties."

"The prince of Wales has not 'bombarded' ministers with his views but has written to them from time to time on issues which he believes to be important," Peat said in a statement.

Blair said he found the prince's opinions "perfectly helpful" and nonpartisan.

"I think he's perfectly entitled to express his views," the prime minister told reporters at his monthly news conference.

On Wednesday, after an appeal by newspapers, the judge ruled that the entire contents of the prince's Hong Kong diary should be made public.

The 3 000-word document, entitled "The Handover of Hong Kong or The Great Chinese Takeaway," features scathing comments about the Chinese leadership, whom he called "appalling old waxworks." The handover ceremony, he wrote, culminated in an "awful Soviet-style display."

Aboard the British Airways 747 to Hong Kong, the prince found himself and his staff "on the top deck in what is normally club class," while political leaders were seated in first class.

"Such is the end of empire, I sighed to myself," the prince wrote.

The prince wrote that he found Blair "a most enjoyable person to talk to - perhaps partly due to his being younger than me."

Former US Secretary of State Madeleine Albright was "good value - seemed to be well disposed towards the UK" - Sapa-AP

[Dr. Shane]

Quote:

---

"We only tolerate a monarchy in this country because the monarch should be neutral in political matters and should stay out of them," said Stephen Haseler, professor of politics at London Metropolitan University and chairperson of the anti-monarchist group Republic.

---

Maybe they should take away the monarch's veto power if they don't think the royal family should have a political opinion.