LONDON, 20 December 2003 — To many people, it was a simple, if tragic, car crash, caused by a drunken chauffeur driving too fast. But some still believe Diana, Princess of Wales, was murdered in a security services conspiracy because she was pregnant by Dodi Al-Fayed. Now, for the first time, an English court is to conduct inquests into the deaths of the princess and Fayed, which may, or may not, resolve many of the outstanding questions about the events in Paris on the night of Aug. 31, 1997.

After more than six years of delay, speculation, doubt and conspiracy theories, the inquests will be formally opened next year at hearings which will pave the way for full inquiries. At the inquests, key figures such as Paul Burrell, the princess’s former butler and Mohammed Al-Fayed, the owner of Harrods and chief architect of the conspiracy theories, could give evidence.

Michael Burgess, who is Surrey coroner and coroner to the Royal Household, will open the inquest on Jan. 6.

Witnesses will not be called on Jan. 6, but Burgess will outline the procedures, and the nature of the evidence he expects to hear.

The delay was caused, not by an attempt at some sort of cover-up, but simply because the French authorities could not release documentation until all legal proceedings there had been exhausted. An investigation concluded in August, 1999, that the crash was a simple accident caused by the chauffeur, Henri Paul, driving too fast while under the influence of drink and drugs.

The proceedings have since been protracted by repeated legal challenges by Fayed, the main source of claims that his son and the princess were murdered by the security services because of the closeness of their relationship and the possibility they would marry. He is still campaigning for a full public inquiry, appearing in court in Scotland to put his case this week.

With the decision last month by a French court to throw out a privacy violation civil case, brought by Fayed against three of the photographers who were following the princess’s car the night she died, his challenges in France have in effect been exhausted.

Burgess stressed on Thursday that only after he has read the 6,000 pages of documentation assembled by the French investigating magistrate, which he clearly expects to be released to him, will he be able to say whether further inquiries need to be made, whether witnesses will be called. But the question of who is likely to be called remains tantalizing, since coroners have considerable freedom in how hearings proceed. While the Spencer family has always accepted the more orthodox explanation for Diana’s death, unlike Fayed.

A spokesman for Fayed said Thursday night: “The remit of a coroner’s inquest is far too narrow. It’s merely to determine the cause of death. Some people have said to me he’s achieved a breakthrough, but this doesn’t affect what’s happening in the court in Scotland.” Burgess could try to avoid creating a platform for Fayed by making the inquest into the princess a substantive inquiry into the events of the night and simply have a shorter formal hearing for her companion. But this will serve only to fuel the conspiracy theories. Among the many claims are that Paul was an informer for the French and British intelligence services and had large amounts of money in several bank accounts and in his pockets on the night.

The high levels of carbon monoxide found in Paul’s blood has also aroused suspicion, with experts saying it would have made him incapable of driving.

The conspirators claim his blood samples could have been switched at the mortuary or mixed up.

Other questions centre on why it took more than an hour to ferry the princess by ambulance to the hospital, and why Paul was heading in the opposite direction to Fayed’s apartment when he left the Ritz hotel. The mysterious white Fiat Uno believed to have clipped the car carrying the couple was never traced but James Andanson, a paparazzi who had followed the couple before, drove a similar car which he sold after the crash, although he produced evidence backing his claim that he was not at the scene. Three years ago, he committed suicide.

But coroners are notoriously reluctant to entertain evidence of wider conspiracies in deaths which are in some way difficult and contentious, a category in which those of the princess and Fayed, must be included.