This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.
You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/live/2015/mar/26/prince-charles-memos-supreme-court-ruling-live
The article has changed 10 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.
| Version 0 | Version 1 |
|---|---|
| Prince Charles memos: supreme court ruling live | Prince Charles memos: supreme court ruling live |
| (34 minutes later) | |
| 9.42am GMT09:42 | |
| The supreme court’s live feed is now up and running. Freedom of Information campaigner Matt Burgess tweets a screengrab. | |
| Supreme Court video for Prince Charles's letters decision is now live. Action to start soon https://t.co/IIqU0zVusH pic.twitter.com/QzLtIaVpH9 | |
| Updated at 9.45am GMT | |
| 9.38am GMT09:38 | |
| Rob Booth is at the supreme court. | |
| Prince Charles memos ruling to be handed down in 10 mins by Lord Neuberger, pres. of Supreme Court. Background here: http://t.co/1IFr79YmfD | |
| Key question for judges in Prince Charles memos case: Was govt right in 2012 to veto top judges' decision order release of letters. | |
| Updated at 9.40am GMT | |
| 9.36am GMT09:36 | |
| Republicans are watching with interest. | |
| Will we end royal secrecy and jeopardise the monarchy or keep royal secrecy and jeopardise democracy? #RoyalSecrets | |
| 9.20am GMT09:20 | |
| The supreme court’s live feed is due to broadcast the ruling here. | |
| Updated at 9.23am GMT | |
| 9.08am GMT09:08 | 9.08am GMT09:08 |
| Prince Charles’s biographer Catherine Mayer, underlines how awkward publication of the letters has become for Prince Charles. | Prince Charles’s biographer Catherine Mayer, underlines how awkward publication of the letters has become for Prince Charles. |
| Speaking to Sky News, she said: | Speaking to Sky News, she said: |
| For Clarence House, they are in a no-win situation here. | For Clarence House, they are in a no-win situation here. |
| If the letters come out clearly there will be some embarrassment relating to maybe a couple of them, if they do not it will look like they have had assistance to bury something, they can’t win. | If the letters come out clearly there will be some embarrassment relating to maybe a couple of them, if they do not it will look like they have had assistance to bury something, they can’t win. |
| 9.04am GMT09:04 | 9.04am GMT09:04 |
| Summary | Summary |
| Welcome to our live coverage of what could be the culmination of a decade-long battle by the Guardian to publish the memos written by Prince Charles to British government ministers. | Welcome to our live coverage of what could be the culmination of a decade-long battle by the Guardian to publish the memos written by Prince Charles to British government ministers. |
| The supreme court in London is due to rule on whether the letters, known as the “black spider memos” due to Charles’ spindly handwriting, should remain confidential. | The supreme court in London is due to rule on whether the letters, known as the “black spider memos” due to Charles’ spindly handwriting, should remain confidential. |
| The 27 letters that are subject of the case were written in 2004 and 2005 to ministers in Tony Blair’s government. | The 27 letters that are subject of the case were written in 2004 and 2005 to ministers in Tony Blair’s government. |
| Despite an earlier court victory, disclosure of the memos was vetoed in 2012 by the then attorney general, Dominic Grieve. He claimed the correspondence contains the prince’s “most deeply held personal views and beliefs” and disclosure might undermine his “position of political neutrality”. | Despite an earlier court victory, disclosure of the memos was vetoed in 2012 by the then attorney general, Dominic Grieve. He claimed the correspondence contains the prince’s “most deeply held personal views and beliefs” and disclosure might undermine his “position of political neutrality”. |
| The letters, which show Charles’s attempts to lobby ministers, were described by the freedom of information tribunal as “advocacy correspondence”. | The letters, which show Charles’s attempts to lobby ministers, were described by the freedom of information tribunal as “advocacy correspondence”. |
| This video explains the background to the decision. | This video explains the background to the decision. |
| A decision is expected at 9.45am and is to be handed down by the president of the court Lord Neuberger, flanked by Lady Hale and Lord Mance. | A decision is expected at 9.45am and is to be handed down by the president of the court Lord Neuberger, flanked by Lady Hale and Lord Mance. |
| Robert Booth and Rob Evans explain what’s at stake: | Robert Booth and Rob Evans explain what’s at stake: |
| If released, the letters could provide fresh ammunition to the prince’s critics, including republicans, who argue that someone who is known to have privately lobbied ministers and disagreed with government policy on issues ranging from farming practices to complementary medicine, can never successfully unify the nation as monarch. | If released, the letters could provide fresh ammunition to the prince’s critics, including republicans, who argue that someone who is known to have privately lobbied ministers and disagreed with government policy on issues ranging from farming practices to complementary medicine, can never successfully unify the nation as monarch. |
| The monarchy’s own website states that “the system of constitutional monarchy bridges the discontinuity of party politics,” but if the letters show him attacking Labour policies, he risks being seen as part of that discontinuity, critics said. | The monarchy’s own website states that “the system of constitutional monarchy bridges the discontinuity of party politics,” but if the letters show him attacking Labour policies, he risks being seen as part of that discontinuity, critics said. |
| But they add: | But they add: |
| Even if the supreme court rules in favour of releasing the memos it will not open the floodgates to Charles’ correspondence with ministers, who have tightened up the Freedom of Information Act to impose a blanket ban on the publication of any correspondence involving the monarch or the heir to the throne for 20 years, or five years after their death, whichever is longer. | Even if the supreme court rules in favour of releasing the memos it will not open the floodgates to Charles’ correspondence with ministers, who have tightened up the Freedom of Information Act to impose a blanket ban on the publication of any correspondence involving the monarch or the heir to the throne for 20 years, or five years after their death, whichever is longer. |
| Ministers conceded that they had made a mistake when Tony Blair’s government originally passed the Act in 2000, because it permitted the disclosure of the prince’s letters if it was shown to be in the public interest. The ban was dubbed “the Prince Charles amendment” by one MP, implemented, according to Whitehall sources, following pressure from the royal family. | Ministers conceded that they had made a mistake when Tony Blair’s government originally passed the Act in 2000, because it permitted the disclosure of the prince’s letters if it was shown to be in the public interest. The ban was dubbed “the Prince Charles amendment” by one MP, implemented, according to Whitehall sources, following pressure from the royal family. |
| Updated at 9.05am GMT | Updated at 9.05am GMT |
| 9.01am GMT09:01 | 9.01am GMT09:01 |
| The Guardian’s battle to publish the letters featured in a Radio 4 documentary last year called the Royal Activist by the political journalist Elinor Goodman. | The Guardian’s battle to publish the letters featured in a Radio 4 documentary last year called the Royal Activist by the political journalist Elinor Goodman. |
| Rob Evans, the Guardian reporter who originally applied to see the correspondence, explained to her why the Guardian wants to see the memos published : | Rob Evans, the Guardian reporter who originally applied to see the correspondence, explained to her why the Guardian wants to see the memos published : |
| If he is having an effect on official government policy making we think the public ought to know about that. And furthermore the public ought to be given the chance to judge whether or not they think that is right or wrong. | If he is having an effect on official government policy making we think the public ought to know about that. And furthermore the public ought to be given the chance to judge whether or not they think that is right or wrong. |
| The programme also featured barrister Geoffrey Robertson who challenged Grieve’s decision to veto the memos. | The programme also featured barrister Geoffrey Robertson who challenged Grieve’s decision to veto the memos. |
| He said Grieve had “left the sphere of rationality” by “pretending that the letters somehow have to be kept secret because they are part of a monarchy training course ... or that we would have less respect for the monarchy if we knew what was in them.”Goodman said there were indications that Buckingham Palace thinks the then attorney general elevated the importance of the letters by the way he handled the case against publication. | He said Grieve had “left the sphere of rationality” by “pretending that the letters somehow have to be kept secret because they are part of a monarchy training course ... or that we would have less respect for the monarchy if we knew what was in them.”Goodman said there were indications that Buckingham Palace thinks the then attorney general elevated the importance of the letters by the way he handled the case against publication. |
| Updated at 9.07am GMT | Updated at 9.07am GMT |