Martin Bashir said ‘professional jealousy’ led to claims about Diana interview

Martin Bashir told colleagues “professional jealousy” and his background were to blame for allegations that he secured an interview with Diana, Princess of Wales through forged documents.

The email was written just months before documentaries into the Panorama interview exposed the scandal.

It, along with around 3,000 emails relating to the affair, have been released by the BBC upon the orders of a judge.

Investigative journalist Andy Webb made a freedom of information request for the emails more than two years ago, and eventually took the case to the information rights tribunal.

In an email dated July 20 2020 and seen by the PA news agency, Mr Bashir told the head of BBC history, Robert Seatter, that forged documents played no role in obtaining the interview and it would have caused less controversy if a “dynastic” journalist such as a Dimbleby had been involved.

He wrote: “I am sorry to hear that this so-called ‘forgery’ story has reared its head again.

“It played no part in the interview but did allow professional jealousy, particularly within the corporation, to hang its hat on alleged wrongdoing.

“At the time, it was also apparent that there was some irritation that a second-generation immigrant of non-white, working class roots should have the temerity to enter a Royal Palace and conduct an interview.

“It would have been so much easier if one of the dynastic families (Dimbleby et al) had done it!”

Mr Bashir appeared to be referring to journalists David Dimbleby, who regularly covers royal and political occasions for the BBC, and Jonathan Dimbleby, who interviewed Charles about his marriage, in his email.

Mr Seatter was asking for a statement from Mr Bashir following being asked to “release an archive interview about the event, which mentions a forgery story involving yourself”.

Bashir also told Mr Seatter he had been praised by the then-prince of Wales’ staff for not giving interviews about the programme.

He wrote: “Since returning to the UK in 2015, and re-joining the BBC in 2016, senior staff in the Prince of Wales’ Office (to my surprise) have expressed their gratitude for my declining of all requests to discuss the interview.

“As I am sure you will understand, the words of the late princess have been deployed to attack surviving members of the Royal Family, particularly the Prince of Wales, something that I have never wanted to do.

“Some day-who knows when (!)- I will need to look back and reflect upon a career that included but hope was not wholly defined by a single interview.

“For that I’ll need to work hard at recollection – something that I find very difficult.”

This was ahead of the November 2020 broadcast of an ITV documentary The Diana Interview: Revenge Of A Princess in which graphic designer Matt Wiessler spoke about mocking up the documents for Bashir.

The BBC later apologised and made a financial settlement with Mr Wiessler.

The newly released documents show Bashir was praised by colleagues at the broadcaster after the interview, with Lord Hall of Birkenhead, who was then the corporation’s director of news, saying Bashir handled it with “excellent judgment”.

A BBC spokesperson said on Tuesday: “Throughout this process we have taken our responsibilities to comply with the directions of the tribunal extremely seriously.

“Therefore we’ve today released approximately 3,000 documents, some 10,000 pages, to Mr Webb.

“This latest disclosure includes many hundreds of pages of duplicates and material that was not related to the 1995 Panorama, but was nevertheless caught by the electronic searches.

“We have made redactions, where necessary, consistent with the Freedom of Information Act.

“There is nothing to support the allegations that the BBC acted in bad faith in 2020 and we maintain this suggestion is simply wrong.

“We have worked to provide relevant material throughout this lengthy process, which has involved extensive archive and record searches spanning nearly 30 years.

“We have also accepted and apologised when errors have been made and taken extensive steps to rectify those errors.

“Further, as has been said many times, far from attempting to conceal or cover up matters, the BBC commissioned Lord Dyson to conduct an independent investigation so that he could gain a full picture of what happened in 1995, including by obtaining any additional materials that people other than the BBC might possess.

“The BBC provided all relevant documentation that was in the BBC’s possession to the Lord Dyson inquiry.

“Other individuals involved in these events also supplied Lord Dyson with written materials, which are detailed in the report.

“This was published in 2021 and the findings accepted in full by the BBC.”