Kristin Clemet, the 69-year-old managing director of the liberal think tank Civita and former Conservative politician, has launched a sharp critique against Aftenposten’s political editor, Kjetil B. Alstadheim. The dispute centers on whether Crown Prince Haakon is obligated to provide further answers regarding the Epstein case.
Dispute Over Royal Accountability
The conflict began after Kjetil B. Alstadheim, 57, argued that Crown Prince Haakon, 52, should answer novel questions about the Epstein case. This follows a recent visit to Møre og Romsdal where the Crown Prince avoided the topic.
In a detailed post on Facebook, Clemet expressed her lack of understanding regarding the criticism published in Aftenposten. She maintains that there is no basis for claiming the Crown Prince owes the public more answers.
Clemet argues that both the Crown Prince and Crown Princess Mette-Marit, 52, have already spoken on the matter. She believes it is reasonable for the Crown Prince to shield his hosts during official visits, ensuring such trips focus on the people being visited rather than being overshadowed by other issues.
The Definition of Political Power
A central point of contention is the nature of the monarchy’s power. Clemet contends that comparing the Crown Prince to a government minister is misleading, as ministers are accountable for the exercise of political power in a democracy.
According to Clemet, the Royal House possesses no such political power. Alstadheim, though, disputes this “simple” portrayal, arguing that the monarchy holds constitutional political power and significant symbolic power.
Alstadheim asserts that because the royals represent Norway abroad and serve to unite the nation, they enjoy great privileges. He argues that these privileges indicate they must tolerate critical questions, similar to other individuals in central societal positions.
Impact on Public Trust
The debate also touches upon the credibility of Crown Princess Mette-Marit’s explanations. In a March interview with NRK, the Crown Princess stated she does not remember what appeared during her Google search of Epstein and expressed a wish that she had the rest of the email correspondence.
Clemet argues that the press often refuses to believe these explanations, suggesting that society usually accepts what others say as truth. She further noted that the Crown Princess has shown deep sympathy for the victims and profound regret.
Despite her defense, Clemet admits that trust in the Crown Princess has “gotten a knock.” She acknowledged feeling disappointed by what the Epstein documents revealed and noted that the interviews given by the royal couple could have ideally provided clearer answers.
Guri Varpe, the communications chief at the Palace, has stated that the Palace does not wish to comment on the matter. Clemet has indicated she has nothing further to add beyond her Facebook post.
Frequently Asked Questions
Why does Kristin Clemet believe the Crown Prince should not answer more questions?
Clemet believes the royal couple has already provided answers and that the Crown Prince should not let official visits be overshadowed by the Epstein case, as those trips should focus on the people being visited.
What is the difference between the views of Clemet and Alstadheim regarding royal power?
Clemet argues the Royal House has no political power and therefore isn’t subject to the same democratic control as a minister. Alstadheim argues they possess constitutional and symbolic power, which necessitates tolerating critical scrutiny.
How has the Epstein case affected the Crown Princess’s standing?
Kristin Clemet acknowledges that trust in the Crown Princess has been weakened and that many, including Clemet herself, were disappointed by the contents of the Epstein documents.
Do you believe symbolic figures in society should be held to the same transparency standards as elected political officials?
