It certainly wasn’t a Royal - there is basically conclusive proof that the one who was accused in the 1970s (Prince Albert Victor, Duke of Clarence) was elsewhere at the time of the five murders that are regarded as the definite work of the Ripper - hundreds of witnesses would have had to deliberately lie to cover up his movements, 75 years before he was even accused.
But there might be something in the files that would be embarassing to somebody’s reputation, I suppose.
Like I said, I don’t think it was a Royal either, but you’re right there’s something embarrassing in those files. Maybe someone “high up” pointed the finger at another “high up” and there is a police report on that statement. Guilty or not, people would go wild with speculation. Still, release the info!