The former director-general of the BBC has accepted the inquiry into how BBC’s Panorama secured its interview with Princess Diana ‘fell short’ after it concluded Martin Bashir used ‘deceitful behaviour’.
Lord Tony Hall today said he was ‘wrong to give Martin Bashir the benefit of the doubt’ and apologised that a BBC investigation ‘fell well short of what was required’, as a report into how the journalist secured his 1995 Panorama interview with Diana, Princess of Wales, was published.
An official inquiry has concluded that Bashir commissioned fake bank statements and used ‘deceitful behaviour’ in a ‘serious breach’ of the BBC’s producer guidelines to secure his interview.
Lord Tony Hall – who director of BBC news and current affairs when the Diana interview was screened – said today he accepts the 1996 BBC inquiry into how Panorama secured its interview with the Princess of Wales.
He was criticised in the investigation by Lord Dyson, the former master of the rolls and head of civil justice, who was appointed to look into the circumstances surrounding the explosive interview which famously featured Diana saying: ‘Well, there were three of us in this marriage, so it was a bit crowded.’
Lord Hall’s full statement to the PA news agency read: ‘I have read Lord Dyson’s report, and I accept that our investigation 25 years ago into how Panorama secured the interview with Princess Diana fell well short of what was required. In hindsight, there were further steps we could and should have taken following complaints about Martin Bashir’s conduct.
‘I was wrong to give Martin Bashir the benefit of the doubt, basing that judgement as I did on what appeared to be deep remorse on his part. Throughout my 35-year career at the BBC, I have always acted in ways I believe were fair, impartial and with the public interest front and centre.
‘While Lord Dyson does not criticise my integrity, I am sorry that our investigation failed to meet the standards that were required.’
Bashir said in a statement following the report: ‘This is the second time that I have willingly fully co-operated with an investigation into events more than 25 years ago. I apologised then, and I do so again now, over the fact that I asked for bank statements to be mocked up. It was a stupid thing to do and was an action I deeply regret. But I absolutely stand by the evidence I gave a quarter of a century ago, and again more recently.
‘I also reiterate that the bank statements had no bearing whatsoever on the personal choice by Princess Diana to take part in the interview. Evidence handed to the inquiry in her own handwriting (and published alongside the report today) unequivocally confirms this, and other compelling evidence presented to Lord Dyson reinforces it. In fact, despite his other findings, Lord Dyson himself in any event accepts that the princess would probably have agreed to be interviewed without what he describes as my ‘intervention’.
‘It is saddening that this single issue has been allowed to overshadow the princess’ brave decision to tell her story, to courageously talk through the difficulties she faced, and, to help address the silence and stigma that surrounded mental health issues all those years ago. She led the way in addressing so many of these issues and that’s why I will always remain immensely proud of that interview.’
Diana’s now-infamous interview sent shockwaves through the monarchy with details about the state of her marriage to the Prince of Wales.
The late Diana’s brother Earl Spencer claimed that in the weeks before the programme, Bashir – who quit the BBC on May 14 – showed him forged bank statements that related to alleged payments made to his sister’s former private secretary Patrick Jephson and another former royal household member by the security services.
The documents falsely suggested the individuals were being paid for keeping the princess under surveillance.
He also showed him mocked-up documents, relating to a former employee of the earl, that Bashir also used as he tried to gain access to the princess.
In 1996 the BBC held an internal investigation which examined the mocked-up documents relating to the earl’s former employee, as it tried to determine whether or not the princess had been misled, with a key piece of evidence, a note from Diana, suggesting she had not.
Source: Read Full Article