During a recent emotional interview with the BBC, Prince Harry candidly discussed his strained relationship with his father, King Charles, as well as the royal family. He also revealed feeling disappointed about his decreased security status.
One of the striking revelations made by Prince Harry was his uncertainty about how much time his father has left to live. Additionally, he expressed a sense of betrayal from certain family members who may never forgive him for his decisions.
Beginning the interview with a tone of regret, Prince Harry mentioned his disappointment regarding the outcome of their situation. He admitted to feeling let down by the legal system and wished he had been warned about the inevitable outcome beforehand.
‘The decision has been a surprise as well as not a surprise, for the time being it’s impossible to take my family back to the UK safely.’
The interviewer then asked what ‘experiences’ the Duke of Sussex hope his children would have had that now they won’t be able to because of the decision.
He said: ‘For a start, the only time I’ve come back to the UK is sadly for funerals or court cases, with the odd charitable function where I can in between that.
‘I put myself at risk for that but I will continue on with a life of public service so I will always support the charities and the people that mean so much to me.
‘I can’t see a world in which I would be bringing my wife and children back to the UK at this point, and the things that they’re going to miss is well, everything. You know I love my country I always have done despite what some people in that country have done.
‘So, you know, I miss the UK I miss parts of the UK of course I do and I think that it’s really quite sad that I won’t be able to show my children my homeland.’
The interviewer then proceeded to ask about the security arrangements that were in place when he travelled to the UK for the court proceedings.
She asked: ‘What about the security arrangements that were in place made you feel it would unsafe for you and your family?’
He responded: ‘There’s only so much that I can say because of the redaction process and the national security matters at hand.
‘Everything. Because in the beginning of 2020 I was scored the highest as far as risk was concerned, and then overnight I was reduced to the lowest without actually going through the risk management board.
‘So one does question how that was even possible and also the motive behind that at the time, and that was in 2020, and as hard as it is to appreciate or understand why the decision was made in the way that it was in 2020, the hardest thing for me has been the ethics of that decision for the past five years.
‘The fact that I still haven’t had a risk management board assessment done for me over the last five years, everybody else within this group of people get it at the minimum once a year.
‘So again I would not have taken it this far if I didn’t have compelling evidence of facts that reveal why the decision was made and I’m sitting here today talking to you where we’ve lost the appeal but the other side have won in keeping me unsafe.
‘So again there’s a lot of question marks a lot of people have. I have all of the truth, I have all the knowledge now throughout the legal process, I’ve uncovered my worse fears and to now know today based on this judgement that there was no legal framework that constrains the decisions of the body Ravec in which the royal household sit on and I didn’t know that until the legal process in 2021.
‘One of the first things my lawyer said to me was as disclosure started, as this process started, she turned around and said “did you know that the Royal household sat on Ravec?” And my jaw hit the floor.’
The interviewer then asked Harry, ‘Do you wish your father had intervened?’
He responded: ‘I’ve never asked him to intervene, I’ve asked him to step out of the way and let the experts do their job.
‘This Ravec committee is an expert committee full of professionals plus the royal household and the royal household don’t have any rule on that, on the Ravec committee, other than helping influence the decisions based on members of the royal family.
‘And five years later, every single visit that I do back to the UK has to go through the royal household. My representative on the Ravec committee still to this day is the royal household.
‘That is not a decision that I choose, I am forced to go through the royal household and accept that they are putting my best interests forward during these conversations and deliberations.
‘So no, I haven’t asked my father to intervene the whole point of a risk management board, which as they say everybody else gets but I haven’t been given since back end of 2019 was the last one I was given.
‘The whole point of that is to have a board and a risk assessment, a separate board from Ravec that considers all of the facts, all of the circumstances.
‘It is a system and an assessment that is designed to be non-bias and to avoid interference. What I know, throughout this legal process is the interference that was created came from the royal household.
‘And the Ravec chair at the time, who I believe I can talk about because he’s no longer there.
‘Sir Richard Mottram, the first thing he did, or the first people that he went to go and see was the royal household and the palace.
‘So whether its the media or whether it’s anybody else that claims that the royal household and my father, my family, don’t have any decision making capabilities on Ravec, well then what’s their role? They’re not experts, what’s their role on that?
‘And Sir Richard Mottram emailed back in January of 2020 that an RMB would be necessary before taking my security away after his visit to the palace that RMB that was planned was abandoned in favour of alternative governance measure.’
The interviewer then pointed out that his change in status justified why he didn’t have the RM review.
She asked Harry, ‘Do you not accept that from the court?’
He replied: ‘My change status hasn’t changed, it can’t change, I am who I am, I am part of what I’m part of and I can never escape that, my circumstances will always be the same.
‘But with a specific answer to the question there are comparisons that exist and again I have to be careful what I saw but I think it would be quite shocking for the British public and the public at large to know, in fact many people do know this, that people who leave public office receive lifetime protection. Regardless of whether there are threats or risks to them.
‘So for me, with a whole list of risks and threats that were known about in 2020 and which have only increased over time, including the Al-Qaeda threat that was published and talked about recently, completely discarded, thrown away ignored because for me security was made conditional on having that official role.
‘That role that everybody knows that myself and my wife wish to carry on but was stopped from being able to do that back in 2020.’
The interviewer then asked: ‘What do you say to those who ask why should the taxpayer pay for your police security if you have your own private security? Where are the gaps there? What’s your response to those who say your getting police protection on a case by case basis?’
He responded: ‘Why don’t you ask that question again but in three parts? If you could? Because you’ve just put three very important questions together and I can’t possibly answer all three of them at the same time.’
She replied: ‘Sure, what do you say to those who ask why the UK taxpayer should pay for police security, you have your own private security?’
He said: ‘Well first off, private security can only do so much, again I can’t go into the details of that but I think most people would be able to figure that out. One of the major things is they don’t have jurisdiction in a foreign country or in any country.
‘They don’t have any jurisdiction. Police protection is effective protection, which is what my grandmother made very clear that we needed. With regard to the taxpayer part of it, I don’t know if we need to go into detail of how much the royal family costs, or how much protection costs.
‘What I will say is that some of the British press, British tabloid press did a very god job in campaigning to have our security removed by quoting figures such as £20million.
‘Right, and through this disclosure process I’ve seen constituents in the UK write to their MP saying as a taxpayer I don’t want to pay for Meghan and Harry’s security at this cost, they’re literally quoting headlines from British newspapers.
‘Those figures are obviously grossly exaggerated by about 18, 19 times and further to that, if you know that other people are being protected, people that have made a choice for public office, then why wouldn’t you be comfortable, happy with someone in my position who has given 35 years service to his country. Two tours of Afghanistan.
‘And the threats and risks to my life. I was born into this position, I was born into those risks and they’ve only increased over time along with my marriage to Meghan and the frenzy across media, mainstream media and social media that that created.
‘I guess on top of that as well, probably what people don’t know, but that is mentioned in the hearing today, Ravec protect private citizens, I was made a private citizen by the royal household, not by Ravec, by the royal household, I can’t be a private citizen.
‘I will never be seen as a private citizen, I will never be treated as a private citizen, not by the media, not by most people and certainly not by anybody that wants to harm me or my wife or our kids. So I think once people realise or understand there are private citizens who have never played any role in public office and never will play any role, that because they are high risk they are protected at taxpayers expense.
‘And rightly so because it will affect, not only could that person end up in hospital or worse on UK soil but it comes down to impact and it comes down to the reputational impact to the UK if that person or those people are injured on UK soil but apparently for me that doesn’t matter.’
The interviewer then asked Harry the difference between the top-level of security he wants and the security is given on a case by case basis.
He responded: ‘The details of the security I can’t talk about, all I will say is that the last RMB assessment I was given I scored the highest, the only person within the family that scored anywhere near that was my grandmother.
‘Overnight I was reduced to the lowest. This case by case basis has been used by Ravec and also by large sections of the British press to say what’s the big problem? You’re given something on a case by case basis.
‘Unfortunately, that case by case basis is separated by my reason for the visit. Just to give you more context on that, it’s not really a case by case basis, it’s an either or. If you’re invited to the UK by your family then we’ll give you security, if you come here for any other reason then you’ll get a very low amount of security.
‘I’m not going to confirm what that is but it is completely insufficient and somewhere along the line people have talked about how all it really is, is someone on the end of the phone. SO no matter how much private security I have around me there’s only so much I can do and operate and function within the UK when it comes to supporting my charities, visiting my friends, all of these things.
‘So I have been treated very very differently to everybody else that exists all examples that exist, past, present, I have been singled out.’
The interviewer then questioned Harry on who he thinks specifically is trying to punish him for leaving the monarchy.
He said; ‘I don’t think that anymore now I know that security was used as leverage and I think what really worries me more than anything else about today’s decision, depending on what happens next is that its set a new precendent that security can be used to control members of the family.
‘And essentially what it does is imprison other members of the family from being able to choose a different life.
‘If for me security is conditional on me having an official role, one that both myself and my wife wish to carry on but then was rejected not by Ravec was rejected by the royal household and the result to that is you lose your security that basically says you can’t live outside of their control if you want to be safe.
‘It’s a pretty hard decision there and I think if you strip away all the noise of everything that’s been said by other people and all the noise that’s been created around this, if you strip that all away I think that what people will hear is the only thing I’ve been asking for throughout this whole process is safety.
‘Both when I was part of the institution and when we left, and the important piece here is for me and my wife, again I’m not sure how much I can say, I can never leave the royal family, that is my family, my larger family.
‘I left the institution because at the end of the day I had to. I didn’t leave it in 2020, I left it in 2021, but security was removed in 2020.’
The interviewer then asked if he will continue to visit the King and whether his children will be able to see their grandfather.
He said: ‘Life is a precious thing and I am acutely aware of the fragility of that, I can only come to the UK safely if I’m invited and.
‘There is a lot of control and ability in my father’s hand, 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 and to carry out an RMB (Risk Management Board).
‘That said there is, this all was initiated under a previous government and there is now a new government. I have had it described to me once people knew about the facts that this is a good old-fashioned establishment stitch-up and that’s what it feels like.’
Speaking on the recent change in his security status, Prince Harry added: ‘There’s a lot we agree on, there’s a lot we disagree on but that aside where is the duty of care?
‘Because as I said life is precious and it’s very clear that from 2020 because I was no longer allowed an official role and because I decided to remove myself eventually from the institution, that my life got devalued from the highest score to the lowest score overnight.
‘I don’t want history to repeat itself I think there’s a lot of other people out there, the majority that also don’t want history to repeat itself. From the disclosure process I’ve discovered that some people want history to repeat itself which is pretty dark.
‘I know all the names of the people that were involved in this process and again you have to question why wasn’t I put through the same risk management board that everybody else was put through including members of my family.
‘Whether I have an official role or not is irrelevant to the security needs that I would need. Let me rephrase that, whether I have an official role or not is irrelevant to the threats, risks, and impact on the reputation on the UK if that were to happen.
‘And again, that is proven by all of the examples that exist out there. So for me having an official role was conditional in keeping security but for everybody else, people who have chosen this life to enter into public office and then leave get it for life, regardless of whether they have risk or threat to their name.
‘And by the way, I agree with that, I think it is the right thing to do, that if you come in and you serve your country, even if it’s a minimum of four years, that you get the protection that you require because of your public service.
‘I was born into this position it wasn’t a choice, I’ve served my country for 35 years, I believe that I’m still continuing to serve my country. Public service is my life, that is the dedication that will never change and then all the other bits and pieces that are added to that.
‘You know there are very very real threats that are out there, some that are known about some that have been withheld and for people in power and responsibility of decisions to know that those threats and risks exist, but to turn around and say because you don’t have an official role your life doesn’t actually matter anymore, you can imagine how I feel about that, but you can also imagine, not even imagine, that is the most illogical argument in the history of arguments.
‘At this point, I’m feeling very let down, it’s the minority of people, especially those that read the tabloids and the press themselves. The press themselves have incited so much hatred towards myself, my wife and even our children.
‘That’s hard to forgive. There are decisions that have been made, there are things that have happened since 2016 especially, throughout my whole life, but let’s stick to 2016.
‘There are things that have happened that I can now forgive I can move past that. I can forgive my family’s involvement, my father, my brother, my stepmother, I can forgive the press to a large extent as well for so many things that have happened.
‘What I’m struggling to forgive and probably what I will always struggle to forgive is that a decision that was made in 2020 that affects my every single day and that is knowingly putting me and my family in harms way.
‘Everybody knew they were putting us at risk in 2020 and they hoped that me knowing that risk would force us to come back.
‘But then when you realise that that didn’t work, do you not want to keep us safe?
‘Whether you’re the government, whether you’re the royal household whether you’re my dad, my family, despite all of our differences do you not want to ensure our safety?
‘And again I am calling for the Home Secretary and the government to do a review of RAVEC and I’m also asking for an RMB assessment that I haven’t received since 2019.’
When asked if the last step to repairing relations with his family was the security issue, he said ‘100 per cent’, adding: ‘Whatever noise is being created, whatever stories have been written, this has always been the sticking point.
‘Put yourself in my shoes, if you step back to try to create a different role, the same official role, but a different working relationship with the institution that you were born into, for the sake of your wife and your own mental health and your child, which now a lot more has come out, because I felt as though it needed to come out – the other side of the story needed to be told, God forbid anything should happen. And I don’t regret that at all.
‘But 2020, when that decision happened, I couldn’t believe it. I actually couldn’t believe it.
‘I thought, with all the disagreements and all of the chaos that’s happening, the one thing that I could rely on is my family keeping me safe.
‘And not only did they decide to remove my security in the UK, but they also signalled to every single government around the world not to protect us.
‘Firstly I am devastated, not so much as devastated with the loss than I am about the people behind the decision feeling as though this is okay. Is it a win for them? Is it a win that I don’t get the protection, that the threats and risks and impact say that I should? I would hope they wouldn’t consider it a win. I’m sure that some people out there probably most likely the people that wish me harm consider this a huge win.
‘There have been so many disagreements, differences between me and some of my family this current situation that has been now ongoing for five years with regards to human life and safety is 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 you know there is, I would love reconciliation with my family there’s no point in continuing to fight anymore, as I said 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.
‘As I learnt through the First Nations, throughout Canada because of the Invictus games their goal in life was always truth and reconciliation and I turned around to them in many conversations and I said reconciliation can’t come without truth. I’ve now found out the truth I’ve shared some of it with you today, a lot of it exists out there whether people choose to ignore it or not so it would be nice to have that reconciliation part now if they don’t want that, that’s entirely up to them.’
When asked ‘Now that the court battle is over do you think you will be able to approach your father and speak about some of those issues?’
The Duke of Sussex responded: ‘No, I don’t think he would ever want to walk about it, I think he would just push it aside and the argument will continue to be this is a government decision and it may well be a government decision but how did they reach that decision?
‘When the Ravec chair the first place that they went to was the palace to understand what it is that the royal household or what the royal family want for me.
‘I have never ever been allowed or offered to make my own representations, not in 2020 and not for the last five years and the new Ravec chair continues to avoid answering some very specific questions that I have and one of your previous questions that I think is really important is this case-by-case basis. For me and only me, there has to be a royal obligation in order to receive protection on UK soil.
‘And I think that speaks volumes.’
