UK (Parliament Politics Magazine) – Researchers seek more transparency from the Foreign Office over Prince Andrew’s records, as Freedom of Information appeals are met with refusal and delays.
Author Andrew Lownie, who is writing the biography of Prince Andrew, was told that the records won’t be available until 2065, with the suggestion that royal family papers are kept closed for 105 years.
A spokesperson for the UK Information Commissioner’s Office last week stated,
“There’s nothing in the Freedom of Information Act about that,”
and said they were not aware of any other legal barriers.
The Foreign Office spokesperson said,
“We take our obligations under the Freedom of Information Act very seriously, and all timeframes are clearly set out in the legislation.”
As reported by The Guardian, Lownie stated that the government is protecting Prince Andrew. He also explained his struggle to obtain information from government departments as a game of ‘whack-a-mole’ and called for more honesty.
Andrew Lownie’s book is coming out next year and he has been requesting to access records of those who travelled with the prince on his business visits, following claims he used trips for personal agreements.
A suspected Chinese spy had close ties with Prince Andrew, which was revealed earlier this month. Then this week, Buckingham Palace acknowledged that Andrew would not be joining the royal family at Sandringham for Christmas.
The National Archives has restricted some royal records, including those on Prince Andrew that had been publicly accessible for decades, after an internal audit.
Bristol University researcher Dr Alison McClean, famous for her work on court and crime records, has raised concerns about public files, including royal documents like Prince Andrew’s Royal Navy training, are now being restricted.
She stated, “This is a rather dubious process, in that the National Archives relies on retrospective application of the exemptions to the FoI Act to justify these reclosures.”
Ms McClean added,
“It’s all internal at the National Archives. There’s no external scrutiny. I don’t think it would withstand a judicial review.”
Under the Public Records Act, government documents are made public after 20 years, but some royal files are exempt, including discussions with the monarch, the heir, and the second in line to the throne, as well as matters of national security or personal data.
Every year, the National Archives makes public records like letters about the late Queen, Princess Margaret, and other royals, but only if they are 105 years old.
An official from the Department for Business and Trade responded in response to the author’s request, stating, “If selected as records of historical importance the files will be transferred to the National Archives. If not selected, they will be destroyed in line with the department’s policy.”
Further, it did not give more details but argued it followed the law.
The National Archives spokeswoman stated,
“When we become aware that open records may contain information that comes under one or more of the exemptions within the FoI Act, e.g. personal information, those records have their access status amended to ‘Access Under Review’ to allow for their review under the FoI Act.”
She added the rules for getting information have changed over the years.