Before Prince Charles’ courtiers rushed to do damage control over the revelations this weekend, the future king had accepted $1.2 million from Osama bin Laden’s family for one of his donations, a royal writer said. Said that Charles had already put his rule in jeopardy. Accepting donations from controversial foreign businessmen and politicians.
In June, Charles’s biographer Tom Bower addressed the revelation that the Prince of Wales had personally accepted three separate bundles of cash from former Qatari Prime Minister Sheikh Hamad bin Jassim bin Jaber Al Thani, totaling $3.6. million.
“The revelation that he carried bags full of £500 banknotes exposes Prince Charles of bad judgment,” Bower wrote. i in the Daily Mail columnn june. But more than Charles showing bad judgment, Bower said, “It is no exaggeration to say that his succession to the throne may be in jeopardy.
“There is no doubt that the future success of the monarchy rests on its integrity. Any doubt of cash for favors involving Prince Charles and his charities raises such issues.”
Charles never personally benefited from donations from bin Laden’s half-brothers and the Qatari sheikh, in defense of Charles. Instead, millions were donated to the Prince of Wales Charitable Fund (PWCF), a nonprofit the Prince uses to make grants to environmental and educational causes. Fund officials have said the organization uses due diligence in accepting donations, and the cases cited were the trustees who made the decision, not Charles.
Bower wrote “Rebel Prince,” a highly criticized 2018 book about Charles, in which he wrote that the prince, unlike his more frugal mother, is fond of finery and lavish spending. Bower has also been in the news recently about his new biography of Meghan Markle, the American daughter-in-law of Charles.
Bower said that Charles has “repeatedly exposed himself to allegations that he took ‘cash for access’, and worse, used his influence to promote those who wanted his Donate to favorite causes.”
He pointed out that Charles’ closest aide, Michael Fawcett, was forced to resign as head of the Prince’s Foundation last year after it became known that he had failed to secure an honorary title and British citizenship for a Saudi businessman. He had used his position and influence to help. in exchange for donations. The Prince Foundation is an umbrella organization for Charles’ various charitable projects.
The Sunday Times previously reported That Charles had accepted money from bin Laden’s half-brothers in 2013, two years after the architect of the 9/11 terrorist attacks was killed by US special forces at a compound near Islamabad in Pakistan.
The Times alleged that Charles had a private meeting with the 76-year-old patriarch of the Saudi family, Baker bin Laden, at Clarence House in London in 2013. He agreed to accept money from Bakr bin Laden and his brother Shafiq. Regardless of the initial items of your advisors.
Sources told the Times that at least one trustee of his charity personally pleaded with him to return the money. “It would cause national outrage if it became known that he accepted money from the family of the perpetrator of the worst terrorist attack in history,” said one of Charles’ domestic workers. Charles was reportedly reminded that 67 Britons were killed along with thousands of Americans in the 9/11 attacks.
“The fact that a member of the highest level of the British establishment was choosing a name for the broker and deals with a family not only set off alarm bells, but caused worldwide panic… Why would you?” A source told the Times. “What good reason to do this?”
In response to the Times story, a Clarence House spokesman acknowledged the donation, but disputed the two main issues raised by the Times report.
First, in 1994 bin Laden was disowned by his family and there is no suggestion that his half-brothers had any links with his terrorist activities.
Second, Clarence House told the Times that the PWCF had assured that “thorough due diligence” had been done, and that the decision to accept the money rested with the trustees, not Charles.
Sir Ian Cheshire, president of the PWCF, told the Times: “Information was sought from a number of sources, including the government.” The donation was “carefully considered” by five trustees at the time. “Any attempt to suggest otherwise is misleading and false,” he said.
Bin Laden’s donation has once again brought negative publicity to the royal family, and Charles in particular, despite clarifications from Clarence House and the PWCF.
Norman Baker, a former Liberal Democrat minister who has written about royal transparency and accountability, told the Times: “Prince Charles continues to show a serious lack of judgment about who he will accept money from.” “He never asks the question whether he should lock up the money. Is this really fair behavior for the heir to the throne?”
The Times reported that Baker and others have also raised concerns about whether the Charity Commission, which governs UK nonprofits, is giving priority to Charles and his nonprofits. The regulator had earlier decided not to investigate PWCF because Charles had accepted bags of cash from a Qatari sheikh. The commission declined to say over the weekend whether it would take action against PWCF over bin Laden’s donations.
“I think the charity commission is too close to Prince Charles and is not doing its job properly,” Baker said.