
Harry reveals he would love to reconcile with royal family
Prince Harry has said his father, King Charles, no longer talks to him because of his legal battle over changes to his security arrangements after he quit royal duties. Saying he did not know how long the King had left to live, the Duke of Sussex called on Sir Keir Starmer to step in and review a Court of Appeal ruling that went against him over the levels of security he is entitled to in the UK.
'I would ask the prime minister to step in. I would ask Yvette Cooper, the home secretary, to look at this very, very carefully,' Harry said after losing his challenge. The decision was 'a good old-fashioned stitch-up', the prince claimed, adding that the specialist body that reviewed the security arrangements should be reviewed.
The Duke of Sussex said he was devastated about losing his legal challenge against the Home Office and claimed that 'for the time being' it was impossible for him to bring his family to the UK safely. Of his estranged relationship with the monarch, he said: 'He won't speak to me because of this security stuff.
'There have been so many disagreements between myself and some of my family,' he said in an emotional interview with the BBC. He said some members of his family would never forgive him for the book he wrote, Spare, in which he revealed a host of royal secrets. However, the duke said he had now 'forgiven' them.
King Charles
'I would love a reconciliation with my family. There's no point in continuing to fight any more,' Harry said. 'I don't know how much longer my father has.' The duke has seen his father, 76, who is being treated for cancer, only once and briefly, since his diagnosis early last year. Better security was key to repairing his relationship with his family, Harry said. The 40-year-old had appealed against the dismissal of his High Court claim against the Home Office over the decision of the Executive Committee for the Protection of Royalty and Public Figures (Ravec) in 2020 that he should receive a different degree of protection when in the UK. Last year, the High Court ruled the decision was lawful. But Harry's barristers told a two-day hearing in April that he was singled out for 'inferior treatment' and that Ravec did not follow its own terms of reference when deciding his security.
Now the decision has been upheld by three Court of Appeal judges who said that, while the prince understandably felt aggrieved, that did not amount to an error of law. The duke said he was 'pretty gutted' about the appeal court's decision, adding: 'We thought it was going to go our way.' His lawyer, Shaheed Fatima, said Harry's life was stake, citing that Al Qaeda had recently called for him to be killed, and he and his wife Meghan had been involved in a dangerous car chase with paparazzi in New York City in 2023. However, the government's legal team said the bespoke arrangement for the prince had advantages from a security assessment point of view.
Harry, along with other senior royals, had received full publicly funded security protection provided by the state before his high-profile exit from official royal life in March 2020. He slated the appeal court's ruling, saying it meant royals could not live outside the control of the royal family. And he said he loved his country and would love to show his young children his homeland, but now he returns only for funerals and court cases.
Next week, Harry's legal team will be back at the High Court as part of the lawsuit he has brought with singer Elton John and other against Associated Newspapers, publisher of the Daily Mail and Mail Online, over alleged widespread unlawful activities. A Home Office spokesperson said: 'We are pleased that the court has found in favour of the government's position in this case.

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Middle East Eye
23-05-2025
- Middle East Eye
Netanyahu defies attorney general to appoint new Shin Bet chief
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has appointed an army general as head of the Shin Bet internal intelligence agency despite a warning from the attorney general that it would be a conflict of interest. The appointment comes just one day after the High Court ruled that the dismissal of former Attorney General Ronen Bar on 16 March was "unlawful". The attorney general warned that Netanyahu was in a conflict of interest due to the Shin Bet's role in investigating the so-called "Qatargate" scandal, an ongoing probe into allegations that Israeli officials accepted payments from Qatar to promote its interests. Despite the legal ruling, Netanyahu pressed forward with the nomination. "That's the law," he declared on Wednesday. New MEE newsletter: Jerusalem Dispatch Sign up to get the latest insights and analysis on Israel-Palestine, alongside Turkey Unpacked and other MEE newsletters "The government of Israel, under my leadership, will appoint the head of the Shin Bet. It is essential to our security. We will do it." Attorney General Gali Baharav-Miara had formally instructed Netanyahu not to proceed with the appointment until the legal implications of the High Court's decision had been fully addressed. Nevertheless, the prime minister acted unilaterally. Bar is expected to step down in mid-June, having submitted his resignation while his dismissal was still being challenged in the High Court. 'If Netanyahu succeeds, he will have reshaped the Shin Bet, the army and the police to serve political loyalty rather than the law' - Ameer Makhoul, expert on Israeli affairs Zini, a religious Zionist, lives in the Keshit settlement in the occupied Syrian Golan Heights. Known for his ideological convictions, he had previously been rejected by Netanyahu for the role of military secretary, reportedly on the grounds that he was 'too messianic'. Speaking to Middle East Eye, Ameer Makhoul, a Haifa-based Palestinian expert on Israeli affairs, said the move signals a broader attempt by Netanyahu to consolidate control over Israel's security institutions. 'If Netanyahu succeeds, he will have reshaped the Shin Bet, the army and the police to serve political loyalty rather than the law,' said Makhoul. He added that the appointment of Zini - a figure aligned with religious Zionism - could lead to increased surveillance and repression of Palestinians across the occupied territories and within Israel, as well as heightened crackdowns on political opposition and protest movements. 'Dismantling institutional checks' According to Makhoul, Netanyahu's move marks a another escalation in his ongoing conflict with Israel's judicial system. 'Netanyahu is trying to make the decision himself, through the government,' he said. 'He is deliberately confronting the Supreme Court to assert that the matter is not a legal overreach, but rather the exclusive right of the government - and specifically the prime minister - to decide who leads the Shin Bet.' Israeli Supreme Court sets aside law to allow for prosecution of war Read More » The appointment also represents a direct challenge to Baharav-Miara, with whom Netanyahu has repeatedly clashed. 'Netanyahu is attacking the attorny general, accusing her of being in a conflict of interest due to her allegedly close ties with both the current and former Shin Bet chiefs,' Makhoul said. 'What he is really trying to do is dismantle all the institutional checks that might limit his power.' Bar's dismissal followed months of growing tension with Netanyahu. In recent weeks, the prime minister accused the Shin Bet chief of failing to take responsibility for intelligence lapses ahead of the 7 October Hamas-led assault on southern Israel, which killed around 1,200 people. He also accused Bar of misleading the public regarding advance security warnings and of interfering in Netanyahu's ongoing corruption trial. Bar responded forcefully to the allegations, stating that Netanyahu's testimony was "full of inaccuracies, partial quotes and half-truths aimed at taking things out of context and changing reality." The political and legal storm surrounding the Shin Bet leadership is expected to intensify in the coming weeks as civil society groups and legal advocates prepare to challenge the appointment in court.


Dubai Eye
23-05-2025
- Dubai Eye
UK signs Chagos deal with Mauritius to seal future of US-UK air base
Britain signed a deal on Thursday to cede sovereignty of the Chagos Islands to Mauritius, after a London judge overturned a last-minute injunction and cleared the way for an agreement the government says is vital to protect the nation's security. The multibillion-dollar deal will allow Britain to retain control of the strategically important US-UK air base on Diego Garcia, the largest island of the archipelago in the Indian Ocean, under a 99-year lease. The signing went ahead after a carefully choreographed ceremony was postponed when lawyers representing a British national born in the Chagos Islands were granted an interim injunction at the High Court in the early hours of Thursday. Judge Martin Chamberlain then lifted that injunction following a hearing, saying Britain's interests would be "substantially prejudiced" if the injunction were to continue. The government, which has been criticised by opposition parties for pursuing a deal they say is overly costly and would play into the hands of China, has long said the agreement is essential to secure the future of Diego Garcia. The signing ends months of wrangling over the deal, the details of which were first announced in October, after the then-Mauritian leader Pravind Jugnauth was replaced by Prime Minister Navin Ramgoolam, who raised concerns about it. It was further delayed after the inauguration of US President Donald Trump in January, with London wanting to give the new administration time to examine the details of the plan. In February, Trump indicated his backing for the deal. The injunction was the latest legal challenge to the deal in the last two decades brought by members of the wider Chagossian diaspora, many of whom ended up in Britain after being forcibly removed from the archipelago more than 50 years ago. It was granted following action by Bertrice Pompe, a British national who was born in Diego Garcia and has criticised the deal for excluding Chagossians. James Eadie, the government's lawyer, said the delay was damaging to British interests and "there is jeopardy to our international relations ... (including with) our most important security and intelligence partner, the US." It is one less headache for Starmer, who is under fire from his own governing Labour Party for implementing welfare cuts to try to better balance Britain's books. But Starmer's political opponents were again critical of the accord, arguing it was both costly and by ceding sovereignty, China could further deepen its ties with Mauritius, benefiting Beijing's influence in the Indian Ocean. "Labour's Chagos Surrender Deal is bad for our defence and security interests, bad for British taxpayers and bad for British Chagossians," Conservative Party foreign affairs spokeswoman Priti Patel said on X. The financial component of the deal includes 3 billion pounds to be paid by Britain to Mauritius over the 99-year term of the agreement, with an option for a 50-year extension and Britain maintaining the right of first refusal thereafter. The base's capabilities are extensive and strategically crucial. Recent operations launched from Diego Garcia include bombing strikes on Houthi targets in Yemen in 2024-2025, humanitarian aid deployments to Gaza and, further back, attacks on Taliban and al-Qaeda targets in Afghanistan in 2001.


Gulf Today
22-05-2025
- Gulf Today
Britain signs Chagos deal with Mauritius to seal future of US-UK air base
Britain signed a deal on Thursday to cede sovereignty of the Chagos Islands to Mauritius, after a London judge overturned a last-minute injunction and cleared the way for an agreement the government says is vital to protect the nation's security. The multibillion-dollar deal will allow Britain to retain control of the strategically important U.S.-UK air base on Diego Garcia, the largest island of the archipelago in the Indian Ocean, under a 99-year lease. The signing went ahead after a carefully choreographed ceremony was postponed when lawyers representing a British national born in the Chagos Islands were granted an interim injunction at the High Court in the early hours of Thursday. Judge Martin Chamberlain then lifted that injunction following a hearing, saying Britain's interests would be "substantially prejudiced" if the injunction were to continue. The government, which has been criticised by opposition parties for pursuing a deal they say is overly costly and would play into the hands of China, has long said the agreement is essential to secure the future of Diego Garcia. "The strategic location of this base is of the utmost significance to Britain, from deploying aircraft to defeat terrorists in Iraq and Afghanistan to anticipating threats in the Red Sea and the Indo-Pacific," Prime Minister Keir Starmer told a news conference. "By agreeing to this deal now, on our terms, we're securing strong protections, including from malign influence, that will allow the base to operate well into the next century." The signing ends months of wrangling over the deal, the details of which were first announced in October, after the then-Mauritian leader Pravind Jugnauth was replaced by Prime Minister Navin Ramgoolam, who raised concerns about it. It was further delayed after the inauguration of U.S. President Donald Trump in January, with London wanting to give the new administration time to examine the details of the plan. In February, Trump indicated his backing for the deal. The injunction was the latest legal challenge to the deal in the last two decades brought by members of the wider Chagossian diaspora, many of whom ended up in Britain after being forcibly removed from the archipelago more than 50 years ago. It was granted following action by Bertrice Pompe, a British national who was born in Diego Garcia and has criticised the deal for excluding Chagossians. James Eadie, the government's lawyer, said the delay was damaging to British interests and "there is jeopardy to our international relations ... (including with) our most important security and intelligence partner, the US" It is one less headache for Starmer, who is under fire from his own governing Labour Party for implementing welfare cuts to try to better balance Britain's books. But Starmer's political opponents were again critical of the accord, arguing it was both costly and by ceding sovereignty, China could further deepen its ties with Mauritius, benefiting Beijing's influence in the Indian Ocean. "Labour's Chagos Surrender Deal is bad for our defence and security interests, bad for British taxpayers and bad for British Chagossians," Conservative Party foreign affairs spokeswoman Priti Patel said on X. The financial component of the deal includes 3 billion pounds to be paid by Britain to Mauritius over the 99-year term of the agreement, with an option for a 50-year extension and Britain maintaining the right of first refusal thereafter. The base's capabilities are extensive and strategically crucial. Recent operations launched from Diego Garcia include bombing strikes on Houthi targets in Yemen in 2024-2025, humanitarian aid deployments to Gaza and, further back, attacks on Taliban and Al Qaeda targets in Afghanistan in 2001. Reuters