BBC's Princess Diana cover-up could be just the tip of the iceberg - analysis by Cameron Walker

The late mother of Prince William and Prince Harry was referring to the love affair between the then Prince Charles and Camilla Parker Bowles, now King Charles and Queen Camilla.

The interview partly featured, once again, on the front page of a national newspaper could make uncomfortable reading for the Head of State, who would perhaps want it confined to the history books.

King Charles is focused on his private recovery from enlarged prostate treatment, and Queen Camilla is holding the fort with a busy diary of public engagements.

Meanwhile, Prince William believes the interview made his "parents' relationship worse"; less than a year after the interview aired, Prince Charles and Princess Diana's divorce was finalised, and the princess died in a car crash a year after that.

But Martin Bashir had a dark secret, and in 2021, a report by Lord Dyson concluded that the BBC covered up "deceitful behaviour" by the journalist to secure the interview with Princess Diana.

In Prince William's words, this "fueled [Diana's] paranoia and substantially influenced what she said".

The heir to the throne's rare public statement following the publication of the Dyson Report showed how strongly he felt about Bashir's deceit and the BBC's cover-up and added to the corporation's reputational damage.

I suspect Prince William will be keeping a close eye on the latest revelations and allegations against the BBC, but his number one priority will be looking after his family, followed by his public duty.

His wife Catherine, Princess of Wales, was released from hospital earlier this week following major abdominal surgery.

The future King and Queen have three young children: Prince George (10), Princess Charlotte (8) and Prince Louis (5).

The Dyson Report also concluded Bashir was in "serious breach" of the BBC's producer guidelines when he faked bank statements and showed them to Diana's brother, Earl Spencer, to get close to the princess.

The BBC apologised and promised never to show the interview again - something Prince William demanded in his strongly worded statement.

So why does this matter now? Questions still remain about an alleged BBC coverup of the scandal.

In 2020, an ITV documentary interviewed former BBC graphic designer Matt Wiessler, who was allegedly made a scapegoat by the BBC.

In the documentary 'The Diana Interview: Revenge Of A Princess', Mr Wiessler claimed he was instructed to mock up fake bank statements to be used by Bashir to show Earl Spencer, Diana's brother.

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

But Journalist Andy Webb suspected a coverup, and put in a freedom of information (FOI) request for emails in the run-up to the ITV documentary.

He had to fight the corporation in the courts, and the BBC reportedly spent hundreds of thousands of pounds on legal fees to try and stop the forced publication of documents, including internal emails, due to what it claimed was "irrelevant" information.

The corporation's fight was in vain, and in December, a judge ordered the BBC to hand over around 3,000 files to Mr Webb.

They have now been made public, but Andy Webb claims the documents he has now received have been heavily censored.

The newly-released documents show Bashir suggested allegations he secured an interview with The Princess of Wales through deceit had a racial undertone.

In an email written by Bashir to the head of BBC History, he said: "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.

But the BBC's cover-up, as shown in Lord Dyson's conclusions, could just be the tip of the iceberg.

Andy Webb appeared on Britain's Newsroom on GB News this morning and said the BBC could have committed a criminal offence in its handling of information related to Martin Bashir's interview with Princess Diana.

Mr Webb told GB News: "It is a fact that to unlawfully conceal information that should be given to anyone, under freedom of information, who requests it... to unlawfully conceal it actually is a crime, and it actually has an unlimited fine. Now, as we speak, people at the ICO - that's the body that administers the Freedom of Information Act - they are looking to see whether the BBC has, as I allege, committed an actual criminal offence."

It is a tricky balance for the BBC, which strives to provide an impartial, accurate and fair news service with "editorial integrity" at its heart.

Bashir's wrongdoings were committed almost three decades ago, and a number of senior managers and journalists have passed through the corporation's doors since then.

A BBC spokesperson said on Tuesday: "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."

All eyes are on the Information Commissioners Office (ICO) to see what they make of Andy Webb's potentially damning allegations against the BBC.