Sentebale is suing Harry for defamation

[QueenOfHertz]

The boot is on the other foot. Hope he knows a good litigation lawyer.

https://variety.com/2026/biz/news/prince-harry-sued-defamation-charity-sentebale-1236714614/

I said earlier I think this is a clash of egos between two egotistical people and I stand by that.

It's worth noting that the statement from Sentebale comes from the board and CEO, not from Dr Chandauka.

Another point is that there was no press release associated with the legal action; it came to light when the court list from 2 weeks ago was made public in the usual way.

Both of those would somewhat argue against this being an ego trip on the part of SC.

Indeed. Even the initial whistleblowing to the Charity Commission back in February 2025 was done quietly and with no fanfare. The only publicity Dr Chandauka seems to have stepped forward for seems to have been in response to media briefings/statements made by Harry & co.

😂😂😂

It just isn’t going to do the charity any real good though is it??

However well the current board come out of it personally, I can’t see large donations reaching Sentebale again ; certainly that is what charity professionals have predicted here.

And though it will not itself be paying the associated fees, the amount of man hours, stress and focus that could have been spent firming up the charity’s position but will instead be expended on the litigation, is enormous. I speak from experience

the only people who can benefit are the board, if they come out of it vindicated, as I hope they will. It wouldn’t surprise me if Dr C is quietly paying the costs herself on behalf of the whole board and the charity, instead of just taking H to court in her own name , but I just don’t see that the exercise will reinvigorate Sentebale

Yes, I do have some concerns about the effect this will have on the reputation of the charity.

I take your point about the amount of time and effort that is taken up with legal cases (I also have experience). I assume that Sentebale have weighed that up and consider it justified, given this part of their statement:

The charity should not continue to use its resources to manage and address the damage this adverse media campaign has caused to its operations and partnerships. This must stop. The Board and Executive Director have taken this legal action to secure that protection.

Yes, I do have some concerns about the effect this will have on the reputation of the charity.

Too late to edit - was going to say I suspect this action will have been discussed with their primary donors.

I suspect you're right, bluegreygreen, though I do agree this kind of thing generally helps nobody but the lawyers

Unfortunately I expect Sentebale were between a rock and a hard place, in that leaving Harry's narrative to run was just as much of a risk as rebutting it - not that he probably gives a damn now he's no longer connected to his plaything and only cares about getting "his truth" across

Sadly I believe Invictus will go the same way, and what he'll do then to pretend to "serve" is anyone's guess, especially as it must now be clear to charities that anything he's involved with turns to the proverbial

I take your point, but surely the ‘campaign’ if there was one was a year ago? I’ve not been aware of anything since in MSM but haven’t been looking for it. maybe any ‘campaign’ since the initial bust-up has been confined to the donor sphere? I guess we’ll find out.

in any event, speculation and unrest that had died down is now fully alive again generally

Sorry, that was to bluegrey

If they do have evidence, which it's hard to believe they don't, then they must be hoping for a quick settlement and a nice chunk of Harry Charles's (probably ultimately the UK taxpayer's as I am currently reading 'And what do you do' ) dosh.

Otherwise the time and reputational hit will surely drag them down, even as it gives us a lot of guilty pleasure.

Yes, that quotation does seem to imply that there is ongoing reputational being done - that H and Dwyer haven't just walked away and moved on but are causing Sentebale ongoing harm. The lawsuit mentions slander and libel, so word-of-mouth as well as printed allegations. And H and Dwyer will, of vourse, know all the charity's former and potential donors.

I rather think Sentebale just want H and Dwyer to stop causing trouble. I tgink.they must be stiill defaming the charity, possibly among the donor group.

@damemaggiescurledupperlip Sentebale's statement says 'since 25 March 2025'. That suggests to me that there has been at least some ongoing action.

I know there was the initial flurry in the mainstream media. The inaccuracies in that were documented in the trustees' 'disinformation' statement.
Public interest disclosure addressing disinformation (from page 76)

I was also aware over the following few months of particularly unpleasant social media campaign against Sentebale, which led to the charity having to close down its social media accounts (as did the chair).
A couple of the newly appointed trustees left after a few months, and there was some suggestion that they had also been targeted in the same way. I don't know if that is true.
An 'adverse media campaign' might also include social media.

From Sentebale's statement:
The charity seeks the court’s intervention, protection, and restitution following a coordinated adverse media campaign conducted since 25 March 2025 that has caused operational disruption and reputational harm to the charity, its leadership, and its strategic partners ...
Sentebale has experienced the adverse media campaign as false narratives circulated through the media about the charity and its leadership, attempts to undermine its relationships with staff, existing and prospective partners, and the forced diversion of leadership time and resources into managing a reputational crisis not of the charity’s making.

Thanks @Rhaidimiddim.

I haven't seen the actual court listing - could you link?

Prince Harry set up Sentebale in honour of his mum, if there is evidence out there that he has been covert in regards to any financial matters/moving of funds/steering of potential donors in order to benefit himself personally, there is no way he is going to want evidence of that to enter the public domain. It will be way too damaging.

I’m fairly confident that Sentebale will have all the receipts to back up the statements in the 2023/25 report and so I’d be surprised if it got as far as going to court.

Will be interesting to see how this develops.

@Puzzledandpissedoff The one I'm most worried about, from Harry's perspective, is African Parks.

He's a director for AP, and I'm not convinced Harry is clear on the legal difference between director and patron.

Soz, I accessed it via someone else'svlink and can't find that post right now. I'll have a look,on the other thread, too.

No worries if you can't find it.

That’s all gone very quiet ( unless I have missed something).

I haven't seen anything (I look every so often).

I don't suppose he does understand the director/patron difference, or indeed anything else, bluegreygreen, and I fully expect this is another plaything he'll have cast aside now its lustre's dimmed, but I'm also not aware of anything new coming from the charity themselves

However never mind ... maybe they'll sue him too

I was thinking about AP earlier on this thread.

No idea what the latest developments are but it all seems to have just gone away for Harry? I had a quick search and it seems as if AP just refused to release the full report and that’s it? Shocking if that’s the case.

Somehow, the scandals that persistently drift around Harry seem to melt away. I’m hoping that Sentabale proves to be the exception.

I do think however that no matter what happens, people will still pay for Harry to be part of their organisation. He’s a huge name and it gets attention - if they can keep him from having any meaningful role while still boosting his ego, they might think the publicity is worth it.

I don’t think anyone has any need to worry about African Parks, it’s a very well established charity. I’ve done some digging and found their last financial statements to 31 December 2024 buried on their website. AP is domiciled in South Africa, with links to other countries, so they’re not governed by the Charity Commission in the UK.

2024 turnover was $115m, with $30m of that coming from various governmental donors, and $61m from individual donors.

Link here: https://www.africanparks.org/sites/default/files/uploads/resources/2025-07/African_Parks_Network-Financial_Statement_2024.pdf

Does that cover the allegations of systematic rape, torture and murder of indigenous populations by AP operatives, and barring them from their own land?

@Starseeking the issue with AP is not financial:

What has been going on there is indeed worrying.

https://metro.co.uk/2024/04/20/torture-allegations-made-prince-harrys-african-parks-charity-20684559/

https://www.rainforestfoundationuk.org/african-parks-acknowledges-multiple-human-rights-violations-in-the-republic-of-congos-odzala-kokoua-national-park/