Of all the British royals, the somewhat eccentric and accident-prone Prince Charles has suffered the most from controversy and public ridicule. He has not been undeserving of sympathy at times, such as during the tabloid gossip-mongering of his unhappy marriage to the late Princess Diana. But there will be little sympathy for his present predicament.
In the latest of a long line of embarrassing blunders, the hapless heir to the throne allowed diaries recording controversial 'private' thoughts to circulate among 100-odd confidants. It was naive of him to imagine that they would never see the light of day. A former secretary handed eight journals to a London newspaper, which published extracts about the handover ceremony in Hong Kong.
A legal action by the prince against the newspaper for breach of copyright and confidentiality, in which he sought to keep his diaries secret, has backfired badly. The court agreed to release them to the media.
The handover diary - a 3,000-word account of the event written on the return flight to London - revealed his discomfort at the end of British rule and a pining for the old empire. It includes rude remarks about Chinese leaders - 'appalling old waxworks'; the handover - 'the great Chinese takeaway'; and the ceremony itself - 'an awful Soviet-style display'; and thoughts about Prime Minister Tony Blair that would have been better kept to himself. In fact it is full of indiscreet views that would be funny if they were the self-mocking of a pompous old twit. Sadly, they show how out of touch he is with the real world.
For example, flying club class, or business class, with British Airways was a revelation to a man used to travelling first class all the way. 'It took me some time to realise that this was not first class (!), although it puzzled me as to why the seat seemed so uncomfortable.' Present and former political dignitaries had taken the first-class seats. The prince wrote: 'Such is the end of Empire, I sighed to myself.'
More disturbing for his future subjects, however, is that the court case has reinforced the impression that Charles may be a constitutional loose cannon. A former aide alleged that the prince saw himself as a 'dissident working against the prevailing political consensus', who would 'readily embrace the political aspects of any contentious issue he was interested in'. Other evidence over the years does nothing to contradict this.