Queen left orders for Harry's security before Charles was urged to 'step in'

28 February 2024 , 15:33

438     0

The late Queen said it was 'imperative' that Harry and Meghan continued to have 'effective security' in the UK (Image: POOL/AFP via Getty Images)

The late Queen Elizabeth II had strong feelings about Prince Harry and his wife Meghan Markle's security.

The Duke of Sussex will seek to appeal against the High Court ruling after he lost his long-running battle against the Government over the level of his personal security in the UK. Harry took legal action against the Home Office after the February 2020 Executive Committee for the Protection of Royalty and Public Figures (Ravec) ruled that he no longer qualified for protection when in the country.

It was a wish of the late Queen that Harry and Meghan had "effective security", but their pleas have now been denied. A letter provided as evidence in the High Court was revealed in December 2023 and was referenced in the ruling today.

A letter written by the Queen's most senior aid said the Royal Family was 'mindful of tragic incidents of the past' (Getty Images)

Written by the Queen's most senior aid Sir Edward Young, the letter stated the late Queen said it was "imperative" that the Duke and Duchess "continue to be provided with effective security" against "extremists". It was sent to cabinet secretary Sir Mark Sedwill following the Sandringham Summit held by the Queen in January 2020.

At the time, royal family members gathered at the Queen's country home of Sandringham in Norfolk to discuss Harry and Meghan's future, after they announced their decision to step back as senior royals earlier that month. The letter read: "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."

Kate Middleton swears by £19.99 rosehip oil that helps 'reduce wrinkles & scars'

In the 52-page, partially redacted document about Harry's security battle that was made public on Wednesday morning, it stated that Sir Edward wrote to Sir Mark on February 6, 2020, to describe what had been agreed between the Queen and Harry and Meghan "about what will and will not change in the ways in which the Duke and Duchess of Sussex lead their lives".

Sir Edward said that not every detail was yet known but he endeavoured to set out as much information as he could. Under the heading 'Security', reference was made to Harry's status as a royal and time in the military service, while it took into account Meghan's fame and history of targeting. It said the Royal Family was also "mindful of tragic incidents of the past".

The letter also said that the Queen and the family recognised that these were "independent processes and decisions about the provision of publicly funded security", which were "for the UK Government, the Government of Canada, and any other host Government".

In 2021, Harry and Meghan sat down with Oprah Winfrey for their bombshell interview where they famously addressed their financial independence. The Duke said: "My family literally cut me off financially, and I had to afford security for us. But I've got what my mum left me and without that we would not have been able to do this. All I wanted was enough money to get security and keep my family safe."

King Charles gave Harry a 'substantial sum' to transition out of his royal role before cutting him off in summer 2020 (Getty Images)

A spokesperson for King Charles later clarified that he had allotted a "substantial sum" from the Duchy of Cornwall to support Harry and Meghan as they transitioned out of their royal roles. "That funding ceased in the summer of last year," the spokesperson said in 2021. "The couple are now financially independent."

In his 2023 autobiography Spare, Harry said he was "desperate" to keep his security and begged his family - including the late Queen - to continue armed police protection. He wrote that he told them: "Look. Please. Meg and I don't care about perks, we care about working, serving - and staying alive." Harry said he was facing "total abandonment".

And royal expert Kristen Meinzer previously told Newsweek that his family needed to intervene. "I just really wish that Charles or some other member of the royal family would step up here," she said. "Maybe they could solve this if they were to step in and maybe this lawsuit then wouldn't even be necessary, but I don't think that they're going to.

She added: "You know what I'm curious about on this, where the other royals stand on this case. The other royals have had experiences where they have wanted protection for people who aren't royal."

At a previous hearing for the security battle, Harry said in a written statement: "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 United States. 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."

The Duke will now seek to appeal against the High Court ruling over his UK security. His legal spokesperson said: "The Duke of Sussex will appeal today's judgment which refuses his judicial review claim against the decision-making body Ravec, which includes the Home Office, the Royal Household and the Met Police.

Kate rules out receiving romantic gift from Prince William on Valentine's Day

"Although these are not labels used by Ravec, three categories – as revealed during the litigation – comprise the 'Ravec cohort': the Role Based Category, the Occasional Category and the Other VIP Category. The Duke is not asking for preferential treatment, but for a fair and lawful application of Ravec's own rules, ensuring that he receives the same consideration as others in accordance with Ravec's own written policy.

"In February 2020, Ravec failed to apply its written policy to the Duke of Sussex and excluded him from a particular risk analysis. The duke's case is that the so-called 'bespoke process' that applies to him, is no substitute for that risk analysis. The Duke of Sussex hopes he will obtain justice from the Court of Appeal, and makes no further comment while the case is ongoing."

Nia Dalton