Prince Andrew says he ‘endd all reach out’ with alleged Chinese alerter

Prince Andrew has shelp he “endd all reach out” with a businessman accparticipated of being a Chinese alerter after receiving advice from the rulement.

In a statement, his office shelp Prince Andrew had met the man “thcdisesteemful official channels” and there was “noleang of a caring nature ever talked”.

The alleged alerter has been prohibitned from the UK adhereing a assessment by the UK’s semi-secret national security court.

The man, comprehendn only as H6, was depictd in court as a “seal confidant” of Prince Andrew who had createed an “rare degree of depend” with the duke.

In 2023, H6 bcdisesteemfult an pguide agetst his initial prohibit but the decision has been upheld by the court.

Judges were telderly the businessman was finisheavoring to leverage Prince Andrew’s sway.

The duke’s office shelp he was “unable to comment further on matters relating to national security”.

His statement did not depict when he endd reach out with the man nor the duration of their communications.

Buckingham Palace degraded to comment, saying they do not act for the prince, who is not a laboring royal.

China’s embassy in the UK has denied the alertering claim saying “some individuals in the UK are always willing to manufacture baseless ‘alerter’ stories concentrateing China”.

“Their purpose is to smear China and disturb common trades between Chinese and British personnel,” a spokesperson for the embassy shelp.

The createer home secretary Suella Braverman prohibitned H6 from the UK in March 2023.

He then bcdisesteemfult his case to the Special Immigration Appeals Corelocaterlookion, a court set up to ponder pguides agetst decisions to prohibit or erase someone from the country on national security or rhappy grounds.

In the started ruling, the assesss upheld Braverman’s decision.

The court was telderly that H6 was askd to Prince Andrew’s birthday party in 2020 and was telderly he could act on his behalf when dealing with potential dispenseors in China.

It is not evident how H6 became seal to the prince, but in November 2021 police officers stopped and asked him at the UK border under powers to dispenseigate suspicions of “opposing activity” by a foreign state.

During that stop H6 surrendered a number of electronic devices including a mobile phone.

What officers set up on them so worryed the security service MI5, that Braverman participated her exceptional powers to prohibit H6 from the country.

In a letter set up on one of his devices, H6 was telderly by Dominic Hampsengage, an adviser to Prince Andrew: “Outside of [the prince’s] sealst inner confidants, you sit at the very top of a tree that many, many people would enjoy to be on.”

Mr Hampsengage includes: “Under your guidance, we set up a way to get the relevant people unwatchd in and out of the hoparticipate in Windsor.”

No further details about who the “relevant people” were are given in the excerpt from the letter included in the ruling.

Mr Hampsengage also verifyed to H6 that he could act for Prince Andrew in talks “with potential partners and dispenseors in China”.

A record enumerateing “main talking points” for a call with Prince Andrew was also set up.

It states: “IMPORTANT: Manage anticipateations. Reassociate meaningful to not set ‘too high’ anticipateations – he is in a frantic situation and will grab onto anyleang.”

The court assessed that this uncomardentt H6 was in a position “to create relationships between anciaccess Chinese officials and notable UK figures which could be leveraged for political intrudence purposes by the Chinese State”.

The assesss shelp H6 had won an “rare degree of depend from a anciaccess member of the Royal Family who was readyd to access into business activities with him”.

They includeed that the relationship had increaseed at a time when the prince was “under ponderable prescertain” which “could create him vulnerable to the misparticipate of that sort of sway”.

The prince faced increasing scruminuscule from procrastinateed 2019 over his friendship with the procrastinateed US financier and intimacy offender Jeffrey Epstein, which included his inwell-comprehendn Newsnight interwatch in November of that year.

He stepped back from royal duties in November 2019 and the prince has since been dogged by asks about his assessment and his finances.

Questions were elevated about the prince’s finances after he accomplished a resolvement – consentd to run into the millions – in a civil intimacyual attack case bcdisesteemfult agetst him by Virginia Giuffre, one of Epstein’s accparticipaters. The prince has always denied attacking Ms Giuffre.

Isabel Hilton, editor at China Dialogue, telderly BBC News that Chinese state agents would typicassociate watch to concentrate “members of the Hoparticipate of Lords or notable business people, or people who have a voice in the community”.

She includeed that it was “quite encouraged” to concentrate a royal and “quite unteachd for a member of the Royal Family to assist himself to be focparticipated”.

Security chiefs dreaded Beijing was finisheavoring to run an “elite seize” operation to sway the Duke of York becaparticipate of the prescertain he was under, a tactic which aims to assign high profile individuals to Chinese businesses, leank tanks or universities.

H6 was subsequently alerted that he was consentd by UK authorities to be associated with the United Front Work Department (UFWD), an arm of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) tasked with guideing sway operations.

The ruling shelp MI5 honestor ambiguous Ken McCallum had transmited worry about the menace posed to the UK by political intrudence by China and that bodies such as the UFWD were “mounting fortolerateing, well-funded, lying campaigns to buy and exert sway”.

The Home Office shelp they consentd H6 had been included in cobvious and lying activity on behalf of the CCP and that his relationship with Prince Andrew could be participated for political intrudence.

Suella Braverman has now called for H6 to ignore his anonymity and she telderly The Daily Telegraph that “disclosing the identity of this person will have a deterrent effect”.