Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s move to distance themselves from the Royal Family was unprecedented, and shocked even the most experienced royal insiders, with Queen Elizabeth left unsure how to handle the situation.
The couple likely underestimated the complexities attached with their decision to ditch royal duties and move to the US, which has led to increased scrutiny directed towards the couple, including a campaign from a Conservative MP to have their titles removed.
Amongst the continuing fallout from their move across the pond, perhaps the consequence most personal to Harry is the downgrading of his UK security when he wishes to return.
The government revoked taxpayer funded specialist police security for the Duke and Duchess of Sussex, as well as their children, after they officially stepped down as working royals in 2020. Prince Harry said he was seeking a judicial review following the decision, which he said left him feeling “unable” to return to the UK.
The legal wrangling has continued to drag on, with representatives of the Duke of Sussex saying at the time: “He remains sixth in line to the throne, served two tours of combat duty in Afghanistan, and in recent years his family has been subjected to well-documented neo-Nazi and extremist threats.
“While his role within the Institution has changed, his profile as a member of the Royal Family has not. Nor has the threat to him and his family.
“The Duke and Duchess of Sussex personally fund a private security team for their family, yet that security cannot replicate the necessary police protection needed whilst in the UK. In the absence of such protection, Prince Harry and his family are unable to return to his home.”
They added: “The UK will always be Prince Harry’s home and a country he wants his wife and children to be safe in. With the lack of police protection, comes too great a personal risk. Prince Harry hopes that his petition – after close to two years of pleas for security in the UK – will resolve this situation.”
Their case was then heard at the High Court last week, with the government arguing that the case should be thrown out.
An excerpt of a statement written by Prince Harry read: “The UK is my home. The UK is central to the heritage of my children and a place I want them to feel at home as much as where they live at the moment in the US. That cannot happen if it’s not possible to keep them safe when they are on UK soil.
“I cannot put my wife in danger like that and, given my experiences in life, I am reluctant to unnecessarily put myself in harm’s way too.”
However, during the case, Queen Elizabeth’s stance on Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s security matters were made clear, as the late monarch felt it was “imperative” that Prince Harry “be provided with effective security”, as revealed in a letter written by her private secretary Sir Edward Young in 2020.
“You will understand well that ensuring that The Duke and Duchess of Sussex remain safe is of paramount importance to Her Majesty and her family,” Young wrote.
“Given The Duke’s public profile by virtue of being born into the Royal Family, his military service, The Duchess’s own independent profile and the well-documented history of targeting of the Sussex family by extremists, it is imperative that the family continues to be provided with effective security.”
The contents of the letter was revealed in separate court action taken by Prince Harry against the Mail On Sunday, following their coverage of his case against the Home Office..
However, Prince Harry’s petition to fund his protective police security was denied.
The Home Office argued that the Executive Committee for the Protection of Royalty and Public Figures (RAVEC) “considered that it was not appropriate to support an outcome whereby wealthy individuals could ‘buy’ Protective Security from specialist police officers (potentially including armed officers), in circumstances where RAVEC has determined that the public interest does not warrant that individual receiving such Protective Security on a publicly-funded basis.”
Justice Chamberlain agreed with the argument laid out by the Home Office, who ruled at London High Court that Prince Harry cannot pay for specialist police protection.
Last week, Prince Harry also lost a bid to have Associated Newspapers libel defence thrown out, following his libel action against the Mail On Sunday over their coverage of the case.
His case against the paper is expected to be heard next year.
