Royalist is The Daily Beast’s newsletter for all things royal and Royal Family. Subscribe here to get it in your inbox every Sunday.
Prince Harry faces a life of permanent “exile,” with King Charles plotting to follow the playbook drawn up by the royals as they overcame the crisis triggered by Edward VIII, the king who abdicated in 1936 and was obliged to live the rest of his life outside the U.K., The Daily Beast understands.
A friend of the king’s told The Daily Beast: “The royals handled the abdication crisis by exiling Edward which meant he and Wallis ultimately came to seem like unimportant, misguided, disloyal, and even treacherous individuals to almost the entirety of the British people. It was a masterful operation in the service of which the Queen Mother, in particular, worked tirelessly.
“The same thing is already happening with Harry and Meghan, and will only gather pace over the next few years under the rule of King Charles. And of course a wayward second son is far less of an existential threat to the fabric of the monarchy than a wayward king.”
Another source, a former Buckingham Palace staffer, told The Daily Beast that King Charles’ accession statement, in which he encouraged his son and Meghan to “continue to build their lives overseas” was an undisguised message to them to not disrupt his reign by making frequent trips to the U.K.
“Harry and Meghan will get an invite to the coronation but they will be firmly seated in the cheap seats along with Beatrice and Eugenie, as they were at the funeral. That will be it. Charles will be ruthless when it comes to protecting the Crown, and that means keeping Harry and Meghan as far from the center of gravity as possible,” the former staffer told The Daily Beast.
The news follows the revelation, reported by the Sun Thursday night, that Harry snubbed Charles’ offer of dinner the night he was at Balmoral following Queen Elizabeth’s death, after Charles had forbidden Meghan from joining Harry at Balmoral.
Instead of joining Charles, Camilla, and William for supper at Charles’ home on the Balmoral estate, Birkhall, Harry stayed with Prince Andrew, Prince Edward and wife Sophie at Balmoral Castle itself.
A source said: “Harry was so busy trying to get Meghan to Balmoral and rowing with his family that he missed the flight. Charles has an open invitation for Harry to dine with him whenever he is in the country. But Harry was so furious that he refused to eat with his father and brother. It was a massive snub. And he got out of Balmoral at the earliest opportunity to catch the first commercial flight back to London.”
Although it was the couple themselves who made the decision to go and live in America, they have eyed a transcontinental role for themselves. As they said, in their first departure announcement, “We now plan to balance our time between the United Kingdom and North America.”
They were equally open about their desire to continue to “represent” the monarchy while being able to earn their own money.
This plan was rebuffed by the queen at the so-called Sandringham Summit, where the couple were told they could have no role in public life as part-time royals.
A palace statement at the time said that the queen had told the couple “that in stepping away from the work of the Royal Family it is not possible to continue with the responsibilities and duties that come with a life of public service.”
In response, Harry and Meghan basically said, “Oh yes we can,” issuing a statement that read: “We can all live a life of service. Service is universal.”
While the queen did not order them to live overseas, as far as is known, the shutdown of travel caused by the pandemic, which struck the world just weeks after they quit the royal family, and the birth of baby Lilibet, essentially parked the question of them traveling back and forth to the U.K. for two years.
King Charles to bring Prince Harry-Meghan Markle back to royal fold?
Little surprise that Vanity Fair’s Katie Nicholl, in her new book The New Royals, says that William and Kate felt “relief” when Harry and Meghan announced their decision to move to the U.S., because they felt that the “drama was gone.”
However the idea, widely assumed, that they have given up the idea of having a significant role in British public life is not accurate. Indeed, Harry has made it explicitly clear in a legal action he is bringing against the British government, seeking automatic police protection when in the U.K., that he still sees the U.K. as his home and wants to operate here.
In a submission made in January this year, Harry’s legal team said: “The U.K. will always be Prince Harry’s home and a country he wants his wife and children to be safe in. With the lack of police protection, comes too great a personal risk.”
At a February court hearing, Harry’s barrister said: “It goes without saying that he does want to come back to see family and friends and to continue to support the charities that are so close to his heart.”
The idea of Harry popping back over every few weeks to do public appearances is likely to give Charles the chills.
So while the decision about Harry’s security is, strictly speaking, a matter for the courts, it is probably safe to rule out the establishment pulling any strings to get Harry what he wants.
Charles’ advisers will be mindful of the fact that when Harry and Meghan dropped into the U.K. at the beginning of this month, having announced what was supposed to be a four-day whirlwind trip supporting charities “close to their hearts” (that phrase again) it completely dominated royal newsfeeds for days on end.
That trip became the subject of intense irritation at the palace, with insiders annoyed at the couple undertaking engagements that looked indistinguishable from their former royal duties.
Then, of course, the queen died, meaning that the four-day excursion became a two-week-plus epic—the couple finally flew home to their children on Tuesday, Sept. 20, Page Six reported, having arrived, it is thought, on Sunday, Sept. 4.
One reasonable interpretation of Harry’s treatment in the days after the queen’s death and at her funeral is that it was part of a strategy of chipping away at Harry’s importance, of reframing him in the public eye from being, “Prince Harry, sixth in line to the throne” to “Prince Harry, minor, non-working royal who lives overseas.”
If Harry and Meghan had sought to blur the lines, via charitable commitments, between their present identity as private citizens and their former identity as royals, the last two weeks offered the palace an unprecedented opportunity to render them again in sharp relief.
The most explicit illustration of this was in the seating arrangements at the queen’s funeral which, humiliatingly, denied Harry a front-row seat in favor of his cousins Peter and Zara Philips. Palace sources have insisted that the seating was decided purely in order of age and that there was “no snub” involved.
Harry’s expression and his reluctance to sing “God Save the King” suggested that he saw things otherwise, understanding all too well that for the second son of the king to be second-rowed in favor of his cousins on the basis of his age was, if not a snub, certainly a massive recalibration of the royal pecking order, which traditionally has accorded privilege on the order of precedence.
This was just one final reminder of Harry’s new lowly, outsider status. The tone was set on the day of the queen’s death when no seat was found for Harry on the military jet that conveyed William, Andrew, and Edward to the queen’s deathbed in Scotland, with Harry instead being forced to take a privately chartered prop plane from a civilian airport, Luton, over an hour from London, and being told of his grandmother’s death just five minutes before the world at large was informed.
After either not being invited to dine with Charles, or—as the Sun reports—refusing, Harry left Balmoral early to fly home on a scheduled BA service. He was subsequently ordered not to wear uniform for any of the ceremonial events before Charles highlighted the fact that it was completely in his gift to allow him to wear uniform, had he been so minded, by ordering Harry to wear uniform during his vigil for the queen.
Prior to the queen’s death, tempers had been stirred by Meghan’s inflammatory interview with The Cut in which she implicitly threatened to release more secrets about her time in the royal family.
However, there is a perception in the palace that Meghan’s attacks on the monarchy can be shrugged off and that they are failing to cut through. The all-important British audience appears to have largely decided she is not credible, principally due to the fact that she has made some bizarre claims in interviews, such as her inexplicable comment comparing her wedding to the freeing of Nelson Mandela, which the British media have then jumped on, and made a huge show of forensically pulling apart.
Harry represents an entirely different level of threat. There is genuine nervousness about the impact his memoir—now thought to be delayed in the wake of the queen’s death, but that has not been confirmed—could have on the king if he decides to launch a serious attack on Charles, which many insiders fear he will.
One explanation for the relentless messaging over the past two weeks that Harry is now firmly outside the royal club, and so are his offspring, could be that it is to undermine Harry’s status as the ultimate insider before the book comes out.
Prince Charles’ office declined to comment on the claims made in this piece when contacted by The Daily Beast.
While there is no reason to doubt, on a personal level, the unofficial line from the palace that Charles loves Harry and wishes nothing more than to be reconciled with his son, the personal will now come a distant second to Charles’ top priority; preserving the Crown.
Harry and Meghan are a huge distraction that the royals don’t need. Charles wants them out of sight and out of mind. So he is likely to feel far more comfortable if Harry and Meghan are safely on the other side of the world—for ever and ever, amen. By Tom Sykes, The Daily Beast
A member of the Kenya Defence Forces (KDF) has been confirmed dead after a vehicle they were traveling in was involved in an accident along the Nairobi-Nakuru Highway.
Nakuru County Police Commander Peter Mwanzo said that the vehicle was heading to Nairobi from North Rift.
"A truck ferrying members of the KDF from Eldoret to Embakasi, Nairobi has been involved in an accident. Unfortunately, we lost one while receiving treatment at the Rift Valley General Hospital,” said Mwanzo.
The police boss said that the cause of the accident was not immediately established.
"It happened just below the Njoro interchange along the Nakuru-Eldoret Highway. The driver of the truck lost control and veered off the road," said Mwanzo.
He explained that several others were rushed to PGH with serious injuries.
"Ten members of KDF were first attended to at the Nakuru hospital. Majority have already been airlifted to Nairobi for further treatment," said Mwanzo. - Kennedy Gachuhi, The Standard
DPP Noordin Haji during a past address. PHOTO | FILE
With only one out of 40 witnesses testifying so far, three years after the prosecution commenced, claims of attempts to derail the wheels of justice have emerged.
The DPP claims witnesses were being dissuaded from testifying, ostensibly to defeat the course of justice.
Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) Noordin Haji now claims there was massive interference with witnesses and an attempt to subvert justice in the prosecution of former National Treasury Cabinet Secretary Henry Rotich and other accused persons in the Arror and Kimwarer dams graft case.
Haji, through Special Prosecutor Taib Ali Taib and Senior Assistant Director Of Public Prosecutions (SADPP) Alexander Muteti, told anti-corruption court Chief Magistrate Lawrence Mugambi that witnesses are being asked to stay away, to slow puncture the multi-billion shillings matter.
With only one out of 40 witnesses testifying so far three years after the prosecution commenced, claims of attempts to derail the wheels of justice have emerged.
"We have prosecuted cases before, but I must say this, and with a heavy heart, that this is a difficult brief, not because of its complexity, but the dynamics that come with it," SADPP Muteti said.
The DPP claims witnesses were being dissuaded from testifying, ostensibly to defeat the course of justice.
"...That was precisely the reason why when we made our application, we sought summons against all the remaining witnesses because the pattern that is emerging is not only disturbing but shocking to the conscience of a reasonable prosecutor," said Muteti.
Former CS Rotich and former Kerio Valley Development Authority (KVDA) Managing Director David Kimosop are among 9 accused persons facing graft charges over the award of tenders for the construction of Arror and Kimwarer dams in Elgeyo Marakwet County.
However, defence lawyers Katwa Kigen and Kioko Kilukumi hit back, accusing the prosecution of sensationalizing the matter and seeking scapegoats after failing to prove their case against the accused persons.
The allegations from Muteti sparked a contest in court with the defence lawyers calling for the prosecution to table evidence.
"If there is interference with witnesses, this is not a matter to come and make statements from the bar, you need evidence, they should have tabled before you affidavit evidence," Kilukumi argued.
He added: "Interfering with a witness is a criminal offence, all these are prosecutors, why are they not prosecuting those interfering?"
Chief Magistrate Lawrence Mugambi concurred with the defence asking the prosecution to substantiate their claims.
"On allegations of witness interference, I concur with the defence submissions that the prosecution should substantiate it by filing appropriate applications instead of sensationalising the matters," said Magistrate Mugambi.
In the same light, SP Talib submitted: "The ODPP has already expressed to you the witness tampering and reluctance that has come up on a large scale. In view of that, we want to assure you that this problem will be dealt with by filing the relevant applications before this court."
So far, only one witness has testified in the matter. Charity Mui, a secretary at KVDA tendered her evidence for eight months, and she was to be followed by Morris Juma, who has since died.
Gideon Rotich, witness number 28, was to testify on Thursday, but asked the court for more time, claiming he needed to refresh his mind on the statement he recorded; a move that triggered a tussle between the prosecution and defence teams.
"Let the witness on the stand tender his evidence, for whatever it is worth so that as we leave this court, fairness is realized both by the defence and the prosecution," Muteti stated.
Kilukumi objected to the move saying: "If an accused person makes such a move, probably his bail will be cancelled, these are well-known and settled principles. Coming here to make statements with political undertones will not help the prosecution."
Ultimately, the witness was allowed to stand down with the magistrate saying that he was not fit to testify as the magistrate called to order the prosecution and defence teams.
"Clearly, looking at the witness, he looks tense and he is not in a state of mind to testify," said Mugambi.
"I urge all counsels to exercise restraint to avoid political undertones to ensure integrity and fairness of this process and safeguard the administration of justice by this court."
Former National Treasury Principal Secretary Dr Kamau Thugge had been charged alongside Rotich and Kimosop, but later had his charges withdrawn and was converted to a state witness in the matter. By Franci's Gachuri, Citizen
A masked journalist is seen in London on April 7, 2020. As journalists face the challenges of covering COVID-19, CPJ and other organizations are working to assess the global impact. (AP/Kirsty Wigglesworth)
Lusaka—Zimbabwean authorities should hold accountable the security agent who attacked journalist Ruvimbo Muchenje at a rally for opposition political party Citizens Coalition for Change (CCC), and the CCC should ensure journalists are not unduly denied access to its public events or harassed for doing their job, the Committee to Protect Journalists said Wednesday.
Around 2 p.m. on September 11, in Chinhoyi, a city about 72 miles (116 kilometers) northwest of the capital of Harare, a CCC security agent denied Muchenje, a reporter for privatey owned website NewsHawks, access to the Gadzema stadium to cover a rally held by party leader Nelson Chamisa, according to newsreports, statements by the Zimbabwe chapter of the regional press freedom group, Media Institute of Southern Africa (MISA), the International Federation of Journalists, and the journalist, who spoke to CPJ via messaging app.
Muchenje told CPJ that a security agent outside the stadium refused to allow her in despite her producing her press pass, which was supposed to grant access to the event. When Muchenje tried to move past and enter the stadium, the agent grabbed and pulled her hair, and threw her to the ground, she said. A second agent joined after Muchenje fell to the ground.
When a driver for another journalist sought to intervene, the agent who attacked her defended his actions, saying that Muchenje had been “disrespectful,” the journalist said, adding that CCC supporters watched but did not intervene during the attack.
The attack lasted several minutes before the agents allowed Muchenje to stand, but one held her by her belt, she said. She was released when Stanley Gama, a former editor of the Daily News who recognized Muchenje, intervened and persuaded the agents to let her go, Gama tweeted and told CPJ via messaging app.
“Zimbabwe’s authorities should transparently investigate and hold accountable the security personnel responsible for attacking journalist Ruvimbo Muchenje,” said Muthoki Mumo, CPJ’s sub-Saharan Africa representative, in Nairobi. “Journalists should not be unduly denied access to events of public interest and are too often harassed, attacked, or arrested simply for doing their job.”
Separately on the same day, Voice of America reporter Nunurai Jena was similarly denied entry to the stadium to cover the rally and harassed by coalition security personnel, according to mediareports.
Coalition spokesperson Fadzayi Mahere told CPJ over the phone that the incidents involving the journalists at the stadium were “unfortunate” and the party had apologized. Muchenje said she had received an apology via messaging app, but CPJ could not confirm whether Jena had received an apology. CPJ tried to reach Jena via messaging apps and phone calls but received no response.
Mahere also promised to ensure the safety of all journalists who cover the coalition’s rallies, Mahere and a Bulawayo24 report said.
Zimbabwe’s information minister, Monica Mutsvangwa, condemned the incidents in a statement, saying attacks on female journalists “border on gender-based violence,” according to newsreports and a copy of the statement posted on Twitter.
For years, there have been incidents of repeated harassment, arrest, and detention of journalists in Zimbabwe, including in March, when a member of Chamisa’s security detail attacked journalist Courage Dutiro for photographing a party member at a rally. By CPJ
CNN’s chief international anchor Christiane Amanpour.
Some 40 minutes after the interview was scheduled due to start and with Raisi running late, an aide told Amanpour the president had suggested that she wear a head scarf.
Amanpour said that she “politely declined.”
Amanpour said that she wears a head scarf while reporting in Iran to comply with the local laws and customs.
Iranian President Ebrahim Raisi withdrew from a long-planned interview with CNN’s chief international anchor Christiane Amanpour at the United Nations General Assembly in New York on Wednesday, after she declined a last-minute demand to wear a head scarf.
Some 40 minutes after the interview was scheduled due to start and with Raisi running late, an aide told Amanpour the president had suggested that she wear a head scarf. Amanpour said that she “politely declined.”
Amanpour, who grew up in the Iranian capital Tehran and is a fluent Farsi speaker, said that she wears a head scarf while reporting in Iran to comply with the local laws and customs, “otherwise you couldn’t operate as a journalist.” But she said that she would not cover her head to conduct an interview with an Iranian official outside a country where it is not required.
“Here in New York, or anywhere else outside of Iran, I have never been asked by any Iranian president – and I have interviewed every single one of them since 1995 – either inside or outside of Iran, never been asked to wear a head scarf,” she said on CNN’s “New Day” program Thursday.
“I very politely declined on behalf of myself and CNN, and female journalists everywhere because it is not a requirement.”
Iranian law requires all women to wear a head covering and loose-fitting clothing in public. The rule has been enforced in Iran since the 1979 Islamic Revolution, and it is obligatory for every woman in the country – including tourists, visiting political figures and journalists.
Amanpour said that Raisi’s aide made clear that the interview – which would have been the Iranian president’s first on American soil – would not happen if she did not wear a head scarf. He referred to it as “a matter of respect,” given that it is the holy months of Muharram and Safar, and referred to “the situation in Iran,” alluding to the protests sweeping the country, she added.
Anti-government protests erupted across Iran last week over the death of 22-year-old Mahsa Amini while in custody, after having been arrested by Iran’s morality police on an accusation of violating the law on head scarves.
Thousands of people have taken to the streets, with some women cutting their hair and burning their hijabs in protest against the law. Human rights groups have reported that at least eight people have been killed in the demonstrations, which have been met with a sharp crackdown by authorities, according to witnesses and videos shared on social media.
The demonstrations appear to be the most large-scale displays of defiance against the Islamic Republic’s rule, one which has become more stringent since the election of Raisi’s hard-line government last year. After eight years of Hassan Rouhani’s moderate administration, Iran elected Raisi, an ultra-conservative judiciary chief whose views are in line with the thinking of the country’s powerful clergy and Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.
In Iran, the headscarf is a potent symbol of a set of personal rules imposed by the country’s clerical leaders, which govern what people can wear, watch and do. Over the past decade, protests have flared as many Iranians have grown resentful of those limitations.
Amini’s death has fueled an outpouring of long-simmering anger over restrictions on personal freedoms. Surveys and reports in recent years have shown an increasing number of Iranians do not believe the hijab, or head scarf should be mandatory.
Iranian officials have claimed Amini died after suffering a “heart attack” and falling into a coma, but her family have said she had no pre-existing heart condition, according to Emtedad news, an Iranian pro-reform media outlet. Scepticism over the officials’ account of her death has also stoked a public outcry.
CCTV footage released by Iran’s state media showed Mahsa Amini collapsing at a “re-education” center where she was taken by the morality police to receive “guidance” on her attire.
Amanpour had planned to probe Raisi on Amini’s death and the protests, as well as the nuclear deal and Iran’s support for Russia in Ukraine but said that she had to walk away.
“As protests continue in Iran and people are being killed, it would have been an important moment to speak with President Raisi,” she said in a Twitter thread.
Informer East Africa is a UK based diaspora Newspaper. It is a unique platform connecting East Africans at home and abroad through news dissemination. It is a forum to learn together, grow together and get entertained at the same time.
To advertise events or products, get in touch by info [at] informereastafrica [dot] com or call +447957636854. If you have an issue or a story, get in touch with the editor through editor[at] informereastafrica [dot] com or call +447886544135.
We also accept donations from our supporters. Please click on "donate". Your donations will go along way in supporting the newspaper.
