|
|
  |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Scope of royal inquiry criticised
LONDON, England -- The decision by Prince Charles to hold only an internal inquiry into the lurid fallout from the Paul Burrell trial has been heavily criticised by politicians and newspapers. The British media said the investigation would do little to quell the speculation and intrigue over allegations of homosexual rape and the sale of gifts by members of Prince Charles' staff. A wider, external investigation had been expected. Instead, the prince's private secretary, Sir Michael Peat, will head the inquiry. Within hours of the announcement by St James's Palace on Tuesday, Peat said he had been instructed to carry out the inquiry "without fear or favour." (Inquiry terms) "Anyone who says it's going to be a complete whitewash doesn't know me very well," he said. One of the key questions to be answered is why the prince ordered a previous internal inquiry -- rather than calling the police straight away -- when allegations surfaced in 1996 that ex-valet George Smith had been raped by another male member of the prince's staff. The Times broadsheet newspaper said on Wednesday that the royal family's attempts to "halt the tide of lurid allegations" had "rebounded." The paper said "rather than appoint a high-powered independent figure, the palace has chosen the prince's private secretary .... and he will not question the queen" over her role in the collapse of the trial of Princess Diana's former butler Paul Burrell. (Special report) The Financial Times said: "By giving the task to Sir Michael Peat, his private secretary, Prince Charles has ignored the demand for an independent investigation into the whole affair. "It is clear that the House of Windsor is still far from understanding the need for much greater openness in the Britain of the 21st century." The Guardian adopted much the same tone. "The announcements yesterday suggest that the palace simply does not realise what it is dealing with," it said. "It can be safely predicted today that when the inquiry reports, however objective it may in fact be, it will be greeted by calls for a further, truly independent inquiry." Only the Daily Telegraph said Peat was "the right man to carry out the inquiry" and said an internal investigation was correct. (Peat profile) It said: "It might sound strange to have an internal inquiry into, among other things, the alleged rape of the ex-valet formerly on Prince Charles's staff, when that has already been subject to another internal inquiry that cleared the alleged rapist. "But it is worth remembering that no actual criminality, or even any definite wrongdoing, has yet been proved. There is not yet any need for the full apparatus of an external inquiry." The tabloid Mirror newspaper, which has serialised Burrell's account of his trial, praised Prince Charles. It said: "He is the only one to insist on an inquiry into the accusations that followed the collapse of the Burrell trial. Yet he is made to look like the only one who has done anything wrong. "It is right that there should be an investigation into the allegations of homosexual rape and the selling of unwanted royal gifts. "One palace -- St James's -- has ordered an investigation. The other -- Buckingham Palace -- has not. The split is once again clear to the whole country, with Prince Charles again taking positive steps and so laying open his own reputation." MPs criticised the decision to keep the inquiry an internal matter at the Prince of Wales's palace. Tony Wright, the Labour chairman of the Commons Public Administration Committee, said: "I think things are so serious that responses like this show really how inadequate they are. "I think now the moment's come for the queen and the prime minister to get together and say, 'Look, what kind of monarchy does this country now want?' I think things are that serious." Another Labour MP, Dennis Skinner, said: "Sir Michael Peat works for the palace, he is paid by the palace, he was knighted by the palace and it is a racing certainty that he will find for the palace." David Winnick, a Labour member of the Commons Home Affairs Select Committee, said: "In the absence of an independent inquiry, these rumours and innuendo will continue and I don't think it does any service to the royal family. "What is important is the perception and the perception may well be that an internal inquiry is being held because an independent one might otherwise be embarrassing."
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
