Prince Harry would ‘love’ to reconcile with family, but says King ‘won’t speak to me’

The Duke of Sussex says he wants ‘reconciliation’ with his estranged family, but can’t see himself bringing his wife and children back to the UK after losing a security court case.

Britain’s Prince Harry made a rare visit to the UK last month for his appeal hearing over the downgrading of his personal security. Picture: AFP

Prince Harry wants “reconciliation” with his estranged family, says he can’t see himself bringing his wife and children back to the UK after losing a security court case.

In an interview with the BBC, which aired hours after London’s Court of Appeal rejected his appeal to restore his full UK police protection when visiting Britain, Prince Harry revealed his father, King Charles, “won’t speak to me because of this security stuff”.

As a result, he said doesn’t know how long his father, who is receiving treatment for cancer, has left to live.

Charles, 76, is being treated for an undisclosed type of cancer. Harry has met with him once briefly since his diagnosis early last year.

Prince Harry would ‘love for reconciliation’ with his estranged family. Picture: AFP

Harry, the Duke of Sussex, has been embroiled in the years-long legal saga since the UK government downgraded his security when he left to live abroad with his wife, Meghan.

Speaking from California, Harry called the court decision a “good old fashioned establishment stitch up” and accused the Royal Household of influencing the ruling.

“Some members of my family will never forgive me for writing a book … but I would love for reconciliation with my family,” Harry told the BBC.

“There’s no point 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.”

Harry says his father ‘won’t speak to me because of this security stuff’. Picture: Chris Jackson/Getty Images)

He alleged the security issue had been “used as leverage” to control him and urged his father and the government to help.

“There is a lot of control and ability in my father’s hands. Ultimately, this whole thing could be resolved through him, not necessarily by intervening, but by stepping aside, allowing the experts to do what is necessary.”

Harry added that he “ can’t see a world in which I would be bringing my wife and children back to the UK”.

He said the original decision to downgrade his protection was “initiated under a previous government, and there is now a new government,” urging Prime Minister Keir Starmer and Interior Minister Yvette Cooper to intervene.

The prince, who is estranged from his family since quitting the royal family in 2020 and writing a tell-all memoir with embarrassing details about the House of Windsor, said “I miss the UK” and that “it’s really quite sad that I won’t be able to show … my children my homeland”.

Court ruling

Harry made a rare appearance in London last month for the two-day Court of Appeal hearing, where his lawyer argued that his life was in danger and the Royal and VIP Executive Committee had singled him out for inferior treatment.

Three judges on the appellate court ruled unanimously Friday that the committee’s decision to strip him of his publicly funded security was not unreasonable.

Justice Geoffrey Vos acknowledged in a 21-page judgment that the Duke of Sussex felt badly treated and his lawyer had made powerful and moving arguments on his behalf. But he said that Harry’s grievance wasn’t legal grounds to challenge the decision to deny him regular security.

“From the Duke of Sussex’s point of view, something may indeed have gone wrong, in that an unintended consequence of his decision to step back from royal duties and spend the majority of his time abroad has been that he has been provided with a more bespoke, and generally lesser, level of protection than when he was in the UK,” Vos said. “But that does not, of itself, give rise to a legal complaint.” The ruling is likely to leave the Duke of Sussex with a large bill to pay the UK government’s legal fees — in addition to his own lawyers’ costs.

The judgment upheld a High Court judge’s decision last year that found that a “bespoke” plan for the Duke of Sussex’s security wasn’t unlawful, irrational or unjustified.

A lawyer for the government said that Harry’s argument repeated his misconceived approach that failed in the lower court.

“It involves a continued failure to see the wood for the trees, advancing propositions available only by reading small parts of the evidence, and now the judgment, out of context and ignoring the totality of the picture,” lawyer James Eadie said.

Harry and Meghan stepped back from their official roles in the family in 2020, because they didn’t feel they were ‘being protected by the institution’. Picture: AFP

Harry and Meghan, Duchess of Sussex, had stepped back from their official roles in the family in 2020, because they didn’t feel they were “being protected by the institution,” his lawyer said.

After doing so, a Home Office committee ruled there was “no basis for publicly funded security support for the duke and duchess within Great Britain.”

Harry claimed that he and his family are endangered when visiting his homeland because of hostility aimed at him and Meghan on social media and through relentless hounding by news media.

Since he lost his government-sponsored protection, Harry faced at least two serious security threats, his lawyer said in court papers. Al-Qaida had published a document that said Harry’s assassination would please Muslims, and he and his wife were involved in a dangerous pursuit by paparazzi in New York.

“There is a person sitting behind me who is being told he is getting a special bespoke process when he knows and has experienced a process that is manifestly inferior in every respect,” Harry’s lawyer, Shaheed Fatima, argued last month.

“His presence here and throughout this appeal is a potent illustration — were one needed — of how much this appeal means to him and his family.”

Harry’s claims life ‘at stake’ in blistering statement

Hours after his BBC interview was broadcast, the Duke of Sussex issued a strongly worded statement condemning the decision by the Royal and VIP Executive Committee (Ravec) to withdraw his police protection, describing it as “a reckless action” that “knowingly put me and my family in harm’s way.”

The prince appeared to cast aspersions on the roles of both his father, the King, and Sir Clive Alderton, the King’s principal private secretary, who formerly sat on Ravec. He wrote that he, the Duchess of Sussex, and their children had been “subjected” to threats from neo-Nazi organisations and extremist factions, including Al-Qaeda.

“This legal action has been a last resort,” Harry said, “but one that has uncovered shocking truths, starting with the fact that the Royal Household are key decision-makers on RAVEC and my sole representation for matters regarding my safety.

“In this process I’ve also learned the names of all those involved, many of whom retired immediately after playing their part.”

“To this present day,” he continued, “the Royal Household remain my sole representation on RAVEC for every visit and could call for this assessment to be done at any point.

“The only possible conclusion that can be drawn is they choose not to, because they know the outcome would prove that my security should never have been removed in the first place.”

He shared his intention to write to the Home Secretary, Yvette Cooper, urging her to “urgently examine the matter and review the Ravec process.”

The Duke contends that he has been “singled out” and “badly treated”, citing what he describes as “unjustified, inferior treatment” since his departure from royal duties five years ago.

His legal team has argued that the withdrawal of Metropolitan Police armed protection while in the United Kingdom has left the prince’s life “at stake.”

AFP and AP