Mohamed Al Fayed is taking legal action challenging Baroness Butler-Sloss's decision not to appoint a jury to sit in judgment at the concurrent inquests into the deaths of Diana, Princess of Wales and Dodi Al Fayed.

Despite Princes William and Harry having declared they hope for a swift conclusion to the inquest into their mother's death, lawyers acting for the Harrods boss have now issued an application for a judicial review of the former judge's decision not to appoint any jury consisting of members of the public.

A spokesman for Mr Al Fayed says: "Following the decision of Lady Butler-Sloss to support publication of the findings of Lord Stevens, in which he set out his personal view that the crash was a traffic accident, lawyers for Mr Al Fayed will argue that by her support of publication she has become so closely associated with Lord Stevens' opinion that she can no longer be viewed as independent and impartial."

"In particular, Mr Al Fayed will challenge Lady Butler-Sloss' decision to hear the inquests without the aid of a jury of ordinary men and women. In a case that is unique in the annals of English law, Mr Al Fayed believes the decision of the coroner not to empanel a jury is perverse."

Handing down a judgment in January following the latest preliminary hearings relating to the upcoming inquest into the deaths of Diana and Dodi, the former High Court judge explained her reason for preferring not to call a jury.

According to the Baroness, only a coroner can offer a "careful and fully reasoned decision" into what is one of the most complex and controversial cases of recent times.

However, Mohamed Al Fayed and his legal team are convinced that a jury consisting of impartial members of the public should decide the verdict. The Egyptian-born businessman continues to argue that his son and the Prince of Wales' ex-wife  were "murdered" by forces within the British Establishment.

Mr Al Fayed himself explains of his decision to take legal action: "If the public is to have confidence in the verdicts that will eventually be reached, it is essential that the public should be fully involved."

"Unless there is a jury, which is allowed to hear all the evidence themselves, I shall not accept the verdicts, and I do not think any right-thinking person in this country, or abroad, will do so either."

Reiterating his belief that Diana, Dodi and their chaueffeur, Henri Paul, were not the victims of a road traffic accident, as Lord Stevens' Operation Paget report stated in December, Mr Fayed says: "I firmly believe that justice must be done and be seen to be done. I am certain that they were murdered. It is now firmly established that Princess Diana herself feared for her safety and pointed the finger directly at senior members of the Royal Family."

Continues the Harrods boss, who was a great friend of Diana's late father, Earl 'Johnnie' Spencer: "How can a Coroner for the Royal Household, appointed by the Queen and apparently in her employ, instil any confidence in me and the public generally that she will fearlessly and independently investigate all the facts, and reach decisions which are impartial?"

Baroness Elizabeth Butler-Sloss, who has come out of retirement to oversee proceedings, has already said she hopes the official concurrent inquests into the deaths of Diana, Princess of Wales and Dodi Al Fayed will get underway at the start of May this year.

Your Name:

Your Email Address:

Your Homepage:


Comment:

BOLD

"QUOTE"

UNDERLINE

Name: Lisa	Comment: I have not changed my opinion(have always thought it an accident) but I would listen and keep an open mind. I hear what you are saying though, it is a shame but it happens that way sometimes.

Name: jj

Comment: I do not see how there can be a jury for this inquest. With all the publicity surrounding the event in the last 10 years, you could not find 12 jurors without pre-conceived opinions and pre-conceived ideas are almost impossible to change. For example has anyone on here ever changed their opinion on the events of that night? Only 3% of UK inquests have a jury and if the verdict did not suit Fayed or the conspiracy theorists then as has been said they would claim the jury had been 'knobbled' or hand picked to give the 'Establishment' verdict.

Name: Muriel	Comment: A jury of 12 or 12 juries of 12,it won't make any difference. Unless he's told what he wants to hear, he will never be satisfied with any outcome. It has gone beyond grieving to obsession, terribly sad.

Name: M-M	Comment: The old quote seems to fit " Justice must not only be done but it must be seen to be done "

Name: Gill Webster	Comment: If they don't accept it by now they never will & nothing anyone does will change those minds. "Ordinary citizens" will be said to have been handpicked to reflect the desired result - or bribed - or blackmailed - or some other scenario....... and where can you truly find any unbiased person in this case, anyway...???

Name: M-M	Comment: Having come this far in time and expense , why spoil the credibility of the Inquest at the end by not having a jury made up of ordinary citizens ?

Name: Trudie	Comment: As much as I would like to see closure in this case, I have to agree that unless there is a jury made up of ordinary citizens the public may never accept any other verdict.