In a troubling development, researchers investigating Prince Andrew’s activities are alleging that UK government agencies are improperly using freedom of information (FOI) laws to block access to files about the disgraced royal. The agencies have provided an array of conflicting justifications for withholding the records, leading to accusations of a coordinated “cover-up” effort.
Inconsistent FOI Denials Raise Red Flags
Author Andrew Lownie, who is working on a biography of Prince Andrew, says his attempts to obtain pertinent documents from various government departments have been repeatedly thwarted. In one instance, the Foreign Office claimed the files could not be released until 2065, suggesting a blanket 105-year embargo on papers related to the royal family. However, the Information Commissioner’s Office states there is no such provision in the FOI Act.
The government’s covering up for Andrew. It’s like playing whack-a-mole trying to get information on the prince from different departments.
– Andrew Lownie, Author and Researcher
Lownie is seeking details on who accompanied Prince Andrew on taxpayer-funded trade missions, following allegations that he leveraged his position and public resources to pursue private business deals. The recent revelation that an alleged Chinese spy had an “unusual degree of trust” with the prince has only intensified scrutiny.
Retroactive Restrictions on Previously Public Files
In a related concern, academics have discovered that some royal files, including those about Prince Andrew, that were open to the public for decades are now being retroactively restricted by the UK National Archives. Dr. Alison McClean of Bristol University argues this “dubious process” relies on retrospective application of FOI exemptions without proper external oversight.
There’s no external scrutiny at the National Archives. It’s all internal. I don’t think these reclosures would withstand a judicial review.
– Dr. Alison McClean, Researcher, Bristol University
Contradictions and Obfuscation from Agencies
Lownie reports receiving contradictory responses from government departments to his FOI requests. Some claim the requested documents don’t exist, while others state there are too many files to search through cost-effectively – the latter being a permissible reason to refuse an FOI request.
In one reply, a Department for Business and Trade official indicated that files not deemed historically important would be destroyed per department policy. The ominous implications did not go unnoticed by concerned researchers.
Calls for Royal Transparency and Accountability
As the inconsistencies and access barriers mount, so too do demands for greater transparency around Prince Andrew’s dealings. Lownie is advocating for a register of royal interests to better inform the public. Meanwhile, the prince’s already tarnished reputation was further damaged by his exclusion from the royal family’s Christmas celebrations last week at Sandringham.
At the heart of this controversy lie fundamental questions about government accountability, the public’s right to information, and the application of FOI laws to the royal family. As Prince Andrew’s activities face intensifying scrutiny, it remains to be seen whether the alleged obfuscation will give way to the transparency that researchers and concerned citizens are demanding.
