Court documents have revealed the late Queen Elizabeth II considered it "imperative" for the Duke and Duchess of Sussex to have "effective security" after leaving the working Royal family.
Sir Edward Young, on behalf of the Queen, emphasized the importance of their safety due to the Duke's public profile, military service, and history of targeting by extremists.
The documents reveal the Palace's insistence on security for the Sussexes, emphasizing the importance of safety for the family, citing the past tragic incidents and invoking the memory of Princess Diana.
ALSO READ| High Court backs Daily Mail's ‘honest opinion’, rules out Prince Harry in the libel lawsuit
The Palace recognized the independent processes for the provision of publicly funded security, involving the UK Government, the government of Canada, and other host governments.
Contradicting the narrative that the Sussexes were cut off by the Royal family after leaving Britain, the documents challenge Prince Harry's portrayal of the Palace's attitude toward his security situation. He had expressed distress and fear about life without UK personal protection officers, describing it as an "obligation" and "implicit promise" from the Palace. However, the decision regarding security does not fall to the Royal family but lies with the independent committee Ravec.
‘Always be much-loved family members’: Queen Elizabeth
{{/usCountry}}Contradicting the narrative that the Sussexes were cut off by the Royal family after leaving Britain, the documents challenge Prince Harry's portrayal of the Palace's attitude toward his security situation. He had expressed distress and fear about life without UK personal protection officers, describing it as an "obligation" and "implicit promise" from the Palace. However, the decision regarding security does not fall to the Royal family but lies with the independent committee Ravec.
‘Always be much-loved family members’: Queen Elizabeth
{{/usCountry}}The Duke's discussions about security after leaving the Royal family, detailed in interviews and his autobiography, portrayed his desperation to retain security. The court case revolves around whether Prince Harry made a genuine offer to pay for his own security and if that message was communicated to decision-makers. The judge ruled that the Mail on Sunday may argue that Prince Harry's team misled the public about his offer to pay for security.
The late Queen's sentiment about the Sussexes was one of familial care, stating they would "always be much-loved family members." After moving to Canada, where they initially received publicly funded security, they eventually sought refuge with Tyler Perry in California, including security offered by him.
ALSO READ| Prince William, Kate Middleton, and children embrace Xmas cheer in white ‘Royal Christmas Card’
The case, set to go to trial, delves into the Duke's security discussions post-Royal family departure. Tensions between the Duke and Sir Edward Young have been noted, with Harry claiming Young's involvement in discussions was inappropriate due to personal tensions. However, representatives argue the relevance of personal tensions in the Duke's change in status when stepping back from royal duties.
The trial is anticipated to explore details surrounding the security arrangements and Prince Harry's alleged offer to fund his own security, shedding light on conflicting narratives between the Sussexes and the Royal family.