Harry and Meghan’s allies insist Sussexes ‘cannot live a normal, private life’

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s allies have pushed back against Buckingham Palace’s recent description of the Sussexes as being “akin to private citizens”, arguing that their status does not reflect the reality of their lives as internationally recognisable public figures.

A source close to the couple told People that Harry and Meghan remain widely known and cannot realistically live an ordinary private existence.

“They are public figures. Members of the public know who they are. The idea that they can live a normal, ‘private’ life is sadly not realistic.”

The comments came after the Lord Chamberlain issued formal guidance on September 7 clarifying the Sussexes’ position as non-working members of the Royal Family.

What Buckingham Palace’s guidance said

The letter, issued by Lord Benyon, reiterated that Harry and Meghan’s status as non-working royals remains unchanged.

It stated that the couple’s position, including the freedom they have regarding financial independence and privacy, would continue to be respected.

The guidance also reaffirmed that Harry and Meghan should not use their His and Her Royal Highness styles and said official organisations seeking clarification about courtesies extended to them — particularly where public money could be involved — should contact Buckingham Palace.

Palace sources have stressed that the letter did not create a new policy. Instead, it restated arrangements agreed at the Sandringham Summit in January 2020, when Harry and Meghan stepped back from their roles as senior working royals.

The Sussexes were reportedly given the contents of the letter only around an hour before it was made public. A spokesperson for the couple said they were “a little surprised not to have been told about this in advance.”

Their allies have since argued that the distinction between being a “private citizen” and a “public figure” is important because Harry and Meghan remain instantly recognisable wherever they go.

Security remains a major point of disagreement

The issue also has particular significance for Harry because of his long-running legal and public battle over security arrangements for his family in the UK.

Harry has argued that his and his family’s public profile continues to expose them to security risks, despite no longer carrying out official royal duties. He has sought a review of the protection available to them while in Britain.

The Palace guidance acknowledged that security questions remain separate from the couple’s royal status, stating that “operational security issues” should continue to be referred to the relevant police authorities.

Those close to Harry and Meghan have therefore been careful to distinguish between their status as non-working royals and their visibility as public figures. Their argument is that describing them as private citizens does not change the fact that they remain globally recognisable.

Uganda’s Invictus decision adds another complication

The dispute took on an unexpected international dimension when Uganda announced its withdrawal from the 2027 Invictus Games shortly after the Palace guidance was published.

General Muhoozi Kainerugaba, chief of Uganda’s armed forces and son of President Yoweri Museveni, said the country would not participate in anything that did not have King Charles’s approval.

Harry’s camp subsequently linked the decision to the Lord Chamberlain’s guidance.

A source close to the Duke told People that the withdrawal was a consequence of the guidance and argued that the letter had been issued without sufficient consultation.

At the time, Uganda had only recently become the 26th nation to join the Invictus community. Its participation was intended to give wounded service personnel an opportunity to take part in the recovery programme through sport.

The source close to Harry also argued that the people most directly affected by the decision would have been the Ugandan competitors who had expected to take part.

However, the situation changed within days.

Uganda later reinstated its participation in the Birmingham 2027 Invictus Games following a telephone conversation between General Kainerugaba and Sir Clive Alderton, King Charles’s principal private secretary. Alderton clarified that the King had no objection to Uganda taking part and encouraged preparations to continue. (Sky News)

The Invictus Games Foundation welcomed Uganda’s return, confirming that the country would remain part of the movement. ITV News reported that Ugandan officials acknowledged the Lord Chamberlain’s letter had caused confusion after referring to Harry and Meghan’s charitable work as being undertaken in a private capacity. (ITVX)

Harry and Charles remain in contact

Despite reports of a complete breakdown in communication between Harry and his father, there has also been evidence of continued contact.

According to the original report, King Charles and Harry have spoken by telephone since the Duke returned to the UK in August. However, the pair had not met face to face since Harry and Meghan came back to Britain.

The King is also understood to support organisations and initiatives that assist wounded service personnel — a point that became particularly relevant following the confusion surrounding Uganda’s Invictus participation.

Harry has continued to publicly support the Invictus movement. On September 17, he attended the inaugural Invictus Spirit Gala in London, his first public appearance since returning to the UK. (People.com)

The episode has therefore highlighted a complicated distinction at the centre of Harry and Meghan’s position: they are no longer working members of the Royal Family, but their allies argue that their global visibility makes the idea of an entirely ordinary private life unrealistic.

For the Sussexes, that distinction remains particularly significant when questions of security, charitable work and their continuing public profile are involved.