The Duke of Sussex has said it is “impossible” for him to bring his wife and children back to the UK after losing his legal challenge over personal security, and revealed he would “love” a reconciliation with his family.
In an emotional interview with the BBC, Prince Harry said his father, King Charles, would not speak to him “because of the security stuff”, but said he wanted reconciliation as life was “precious” and he did not know how long his father, who has been diagnosed with cancer, had left to live.
Speaking in California, where he now lives, Harry, 40, said: “For the time being, it’s impossible for me to take my family back to the UK safely.”
He added: “I can’t see a world in which I would be bringing my wife and children back to the UK at this point … I love my country. I always have done, despite what some people in that country have done. I miss the UK. And it’s really quite sad I won’t be able to show my children my homeland.”
Harry had sought to overturn changes to his security provision while in the UK, which were made after he and the Duchess of Sussex stepped away from royal duties in 2020.
He was offered “bespoke” security, which he felt was inferior and claimed the Executive Committee for the Protection of Royalty and Public Figures (known as Ravec), which authorises security measures, had breached its own terms of reference by not conducting a risk management board (RMB) before making the decision.
He insisted his father could help resolve the issue, though he had not asked him to intervene. “I can only come to the UK safely if I am invited, and there is a lot of control and ability in my father’s hands.
“Ultimately, this whole thing could be resolved through him, not by intervening, but by stepping aside and allowing the experts to do what is necessary and to carry out an RMB,” he said.
It is understood it would have been constitutionally improper for the king to intervene while the matter was being considered by the government and reviewed by the courts.
Although the royal household provides representation and input into the Ravec decision, Friday’s judgment laid out that the chair of the Ravec committee was the decision maker on the provision of security. Royal private offices and private secretaries should be consulted as to the practicalities of the protection measures agreed, the ruling said.
Harry appealed to the prime minister, Keir Starmer, saying: “This all was initiated under a previous government. There is now a new government. I have had it described to me by people who know about the facts that this is a good old-fashioned establishment stitch-up. And that’s what it feels like.”
Asked whether the prime minister should “step in”, he replied: “Yes, I would ask the prime minister to step in.
“I would ask Yvette Cooper, the home secretary, to look at this very, very carefully and I would ask her to review Ravec and its members, because if it is an expert body, then what is the royal household’s role there if it is not to influence and decide what they want for the members of their household?”
The prime minister would be “quite reluctant” to become involved in decisions about Harry’s security, a senior cabinet minister said on Friday night. Pat McFadden told Sky News: “I think he would be quite reluctant to make a judgment about someone’s personal security needs. We have experts who do that for a reason, and I’m not sure it’s a good idea for any politician to be saying that that person requires this level or that level of security.”
On his family rift, Harry said: “There have been so many disagreements, differences between me and some of my family. This current situation, that has been ongoing now for five years with regard to human life and safety as the sticking point. It is the only thing that’s left.
“Of course some members of my family will never forgive me for writing a book, of course they will never forgive me for lots of things, but … I would love reconciliation with my family.
after newsletter promotion
“There’s no point in continuing to fight any more. Life is precious. I don’t know how much longer my father has. He won’t speak to me because of this security stuff. But it would be nice to reconcile.”
He added: “If they want that, it’s entirely up to them.”
Harry said he could never leave the royal family, though he had left the “institution” because “I had to”.
He continued: “Whether I have an official role or not is irrelevant to the threats, risk and impact on the reputation of the UK if something was to happen. What really worries me more than anything else about today’s decision [is that] it set a new precedent that security can be used to control members of the family, and effectively, what it does is imprison other members of the family from being able to choose a different life.”
He claimed that, through the court disclosure process, he had “discovered that some people want history to repeat itself, which is pretty dark”. Asked who he meant, Harry declined to answer.
In a statement released on the Sussexes’ website, Harry said: “Ravec’s ability to make decisions outside of its own policies and the so-called political sensitivities of my case have prevailed over the need for fair and consistent decision-making. The court has decided to defer to this, revealing a sad truth: my hands are tied in seeking legal recourse against the establishment.
“This all comes from the same institutions that preyed upon my mother, that openly campaigned for the removal of our security, and that continue to incite hatred towards me, my wife and even our children, while at the same time protecting the very power that they should be holding accountable.”
He told the BBC he was “devastated” by the court’s decision, adding: “Not so much devastated with the loss [as] about the people behind the decision feeling as though this is OK. Is it a win for them? I’m sure there are some people out there, probably most likely the people that wish me harm, [who] consider this a huge win.”
He indicated that he would not be seeking a further legal challenge, saying Friday’s ruling had “proven that there was no way to win this through the courts”.
A spokesperson for Buckingham Palace said: “All of these issues have been examined repeatedly and meticulously by the courts, with the same conclusion reached on each occasion.”
