Is Harry and Meghan’s Archewell Foundation ‘delinquent?’

If there is one thing that Harry and Meghan excel at, it is snatching defeat from the jaws of victory. Their much-hyped trip to Nigeria — a royal visit in all but name — had, from their perspective, gone exceptionally well. Not only did Harry manage to deliver a well-received speech about mental health to a group of students, but the pair were besieged by admirers and well-wishers everywhere they went, all desperate for a selfie, a handshake or a hug. Little wonder, then, that Meghan — never shy about jumping on a bandwagon or seizing an opportunity — solemnly declared that she had taken a DNA test that revealed that she was 43 percent Nigerian, which she took as the ultimate compliment: “It is a compliment to you because what they define as a Nigerian woman is brave, resilient, courageous, beautiful.” All seemed perfect. And then the pair’s charity was publicly castigated as delinquent, and the dream unraveled .

In fairness, such a judgement is not quite as damning as it might appear at first. The Archewell Foundation, the couple’s charitable endeavor, has been banned from soliciting or spending any money for the time being due to discrepancies in paperwork not being filed and fees not being paid on time, and therefore has earned the unwelcome tag of delinquency. The Californian attorney general has sent a stern letter telling the administrators of the foundation to put their house in order, pronto. It declared that “an organization that is listed as delinquent is not in good standing and is prohibited from engaging in conduct for which registration is required, including soliciting or disbursing charitable funds.”

It has been suggested — bizarrely, in 2024 — that the source of the difficulty has come from a promised check not being delivered. This has now been reissued, and so, ideally, Archewell will have the stigma of delinquency lifted from it and be free to hold out the figurative begging bowl once again before very long. As anyone who has ever had any difficulties with their bank or taxman knows, such discrepancies, while irritating and often embarrassing, are part of life. Yet it is hard not to feel that the mistake, while amusing but inconsequential on its own terms, reflects a larger attitude on the parts of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex. The reason why the Nigeria trip worked well for them both was that it was the perfect display of soft power and influence, conducted entirely on their own terms. When fantasy coincides with reality, the result is usually a let-down.

This was particularly true of Harry’s recent visit to London, where it was briefed that he did not see his father because the king was “too busy” to make time in his schedule. As is usually the case now, this led to pained counter-briefings that suggested the opposite. A well-placed “friend” of Charles described the situation as “all very sad” and scoffed, “While [the king] was hardly going to roll out the red carpet the moment this Invictus trip was announced, with doctors advising him to focus on his treatment and recovery, the idea that he refused to find space in his diary… well, let’s say recollections may vary once again.” After an emotional meeting between father and son in February when the king’s illness was made public, this suggests that the reconciliation that both publicly claim to be desperate for shows no signs of coming to fruition.

It remains uncertain what public role Harry and Meghan truly want for themselves. Perhaps they see themselves as a pair of international do-gooders, floating in and out of various countries and dispensing largesse and good cheer everywhere they go. If so, this is a commendable, if slightly naïve, idea, unless it will be paid for by jam sales of her lifestyle brand America Riviera Orchard. The age of unquestioning, fawning noblesse oblige has long since passed, and in its place are boring but necessary responsibilities that have to be faced up to. Otherwise, the tag of “delinquent” is one that will hang heavy over this particular duo for a considerable time to come.

This article was originally published on The Spectator’s UK website.