Prince Harry issued a furious denial of inaccuracy today after an anti-monarchy campaign group accused the prince of violating the rules on funding the charity.
In a letter to the Charity Commission, Graham Smith, CEO of the anti-Royal Republic campaign group, alleged that the funds were transferred from the Royal William and Kate Foundation to the Harry and Meghan Foundation due to “personal relationship” between the two sponsors and defendants. organizations for “inappropriate use of charitable funds, conflicts of interest and lack of independence”.
The annual report of the William and Kate Foundation shows that he paid Sussex Royal £ 145,000 to finance its installation and launch, with another £ 144,901 earmarked for Harry Travalyst’s sustainable tourism project, which was under the umbrella of the charity of Sussex.
In his letter to the commission, Graham Smith of Republic wrote: “These two charities appear to be in breach of the guidelines on the proper use of charitable funds and may be in breach of their duty to act independently and exclusively in the interest of their objectives. “
He added, of two grants from the Royal Foundation to the Sussex projects: “In both cases, it seems that the only reason for the decision was the personal relationship between two sponsors, the Duke of Sussex and the Duke of Cambridge.”
Republic previously used a variation of this tactic in an attempt to embarrass Prince Charles in 2009, reporting to the Charity Commission of the Prince’s Foundation for the Built Environment. In that case, Prince Charles took the traditional royal vow of silence and made no public comment. The complaint was reported by the media, but not extensively, and the complaint was rejected by the Charity Commission.
Prince Harry, however, decided to take a different course and, in an extraordinary statement issued today through his lawyers, accused Republic of “salaciously” feeding “a hunger for media attention, as well as a shared and attacking agenda , which is neither correct nor fair. “
Harry also accused the group’s complaint, which campaigns for a democratically elected head of state, of being “defamatory and insulting to all the amazing organizations and people it has partnered with.”
“We have not said anything defamatory. We examined some evidence and filed a complaint.“
– Graham smith
The statement appeared to threaten legal action against Republic, saying that Harry’s “charitable efforts” are “transparent and exaggerated.” Suggesting otherwise is unequivocally incorrect and will act in accordance with the weight of the law.
The statement added: “All of The Duke’s charitable activities are fully transparent and comply with the guidelines of the Charity Commission and, in addition, with its own moral compass.”
“Travalyst (which was founded at Sussex Royal) is a non-profit organization for which The Duke does not receive any commercial or financial gain, as is the case with all of its charitable commitments. The Duke has not had and has not had any personal financial interest in his charitable work. The interest has always been clear: supporting others and making a positive difference. “
A spokesperson who worked with Sussex Royal told Yahoo News: “The grants awarded to the non-profit organization Travalyst are for the continued development of projects that will support communities, wildlife and the environment through travel and tourism. sustainable.
“All of the grants have been conducted impartially and objectively, in line with governance requirements, and have been reported transparently in accordance with regulations.”
A spokesperson for the Royal William and Kate Foundation said: “The donations made to Sussex Royal were to support the charitable work of The Duke and Duchess of Sussex. They were fully in line with the governance requirements and were reported transparently. “
An unflappable loud Smith told The Daily Beast that Harry’s response seemed “an overreaction.”
When asked if he was nervous about being sued, Smith, who said he supported the letter, said: “We have not said anything defamatory. We examined some evidence and filed a complaint. I think they’re just trying to shut us up and other people to shut up. “
.
