SARAH VINE: Harry and Meghan cast themselves as refugees from a repressive regime. The king must give them what they claim to want and set them free… by stripping them of their royal titles

When I saw the photos of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex at the Bob Marley movie premiere in Kingston, Jamaica, the first thing that came to mind was how thoroughly refreshed they both looked.

Indeed, I had to do a double take to make sure it was really the Duchess escorting Prince Harry, and not some dewy, doe-eyed lookalike.

Maybe it was just a trick of the light, but it looks like she's improved her skincare routine since we last saw her.

The prince, meanwhile, seemed remarkably impatient for a man who is likely to have to pay three-quarters of a million pounds in legal fees as a result of his failed libel action against the Mail on Sunday. I don't know what they put in the water there in Montecito, but it sure works.

Yet all that gloss doesn't hide the ugly fact that the couple – normally so vocal when it comes to informing the world of their heartfelt feelings – have yet to say a single word in public about Harry's father, the King. and his health problems.

Considering how much the Prince likes to use his platform for good, you might have thought he would have taken this opportunity to remind other men how important it is to get their prostate checked.

As for the Duchess, normally a strong supporter of women's health, it seems rather unsisterly not to wish the Princess of Wales a speedy recovery from her abdominal surgery.

That they should have chosen this particular opportunity to break cover is also intriguing. Jamaica is not exactly a friend of the British monarchy. The country's Prime Minister Andrew Holness, who joined the Sussexes at the premiere with his wife Juliet, has expressed hope that his people will cut ties with Britain if they vote in a referendum on the issue later this year.

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle at the red carpet premiere of the Bob Marley movie last night

The Sussexes have yet to say a single word publicly about Harry's father, the King (left), and his health problems and those of Kate, pictured right

Anti-monarchist sentiment has grown since the death of Elizabeth II, who enjoyed the affection and respect of many Jamaicans. Sadly, these sentiments do not appear to have transferred to King Charles, with one staunch anti-monarchist, Hugh Small QC, telling The Guardian newspaper last year that he 'can't stand' the thought of the King being head of state. from Jamaica.

But there is something else driving Jamaica's disdain for the Crown: the idea that the British royal family is inherently racist and that the Duchess of Sussex was the victim of prejudice during her time in the palace.

This idea was, of course, vehemently denied when the Queen was alive, but recently resurrected by the Sussexes' mouthpiece, Omid Scobie, in his most recent hagiography Endgame, in which he 'accidentally' named alleged 'royal racists' King Charles . and the Princess of Wales.

These accusations would undoubtedly have caused great distress to both the king and the princess.

Actually being canceled by your own son must take its toll on a man, and I can only imagine how stressful it must be for the Princess of Wales to not only catch up on the backlog created by the departure of the Duchess of Sussex, but also to do so with a smile on her face while being repeatedly kicked in the teeth by the latter's cheerleaders.

I doubt whether that idea would have occurred to the Duke and Duchess, who in the past have shown themselves completely immune to the suffering their statements could cause.

Indeed, they did not hold back when Prince Philip was dying, nor when the Queen was in her final months. The idea that they have to care about what the people at home are going through is very unfortunate for the birds.

By choosing to take cover in such fiercely anti-monarchist company, the Duke and Duchess appear to be sending a very clear message to the palace. It seems to me that they intend to use their royal connection to undermine both the individual reputations of members of the royal family and that of the institution as a whole. I hope I'm wrong.

By casting themselves as refugees from a regressive and repressive regime, they are tapping into the divisive culture wars that now dominate much of our public debate and help fuel anti-royalist sentiment in the Commonwealth and elsewhere.

The late queen, who loved the Commonwealth and used her position to promote forgiveness and understanding, is said to be heartbroken. As for King Charles, I see only one course of action: he should give them what they claim to want and free them from their royal chains by ultimately stripping them of all titles.