After announcing a multi-year global partnership with beauty and hygiene product mogul, Procter and Gamble, Prince Harry and wife Meghan Markle are now facing questions about their association with the apparent ‘racist’ brand.

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex came under pressure after their new partnership brought to light P&G’s sale of skin-lightening creams in Africa and Asia.

Many of those creams are purported to “inhibit melanin formation in the deepest layer of skin”, create “radiant and brighter skin” as well as to create “pinkish fairness”.

The creams, which are said to reduce the production of melanin in the skin, have been criticised by campaigners for creating a “toxic belief” that a “person’s worth is measured by the colour of their skin”.

Former P&G executive Alex Malouf said Harry and Meghan would face pressure to say whether or not they supported the sale of these products and given that, “Meghan has talked a lot about the issue of race and racism, this (partnership) does stick out like a sore thumb”.

CALLS TO SPEAK OUT

Among those calling on the company to desist from selling skin-whitening products are Nina Davuluri, the first Indian-American to win Miss America, Robin Averbeck, from the Rainforest Action Network and Joanne Rondilla, San Jose State University professor.

According to Davuluri, the creams sell a “racist” ideology “that you need white skin to be beautiful (and) you need white skin to be successful”.

Rondilla, who has researched skin-lightening creams being sold in the Philippines, stated that Harry and Meghan had a “responsibility” to speak out about the products, referencing the couple’s Oprah interview, during which Markle shedded light on the issue of colourism within the royal family.

Averback argued that Harry and Meghan should end their relationship with P&G, as the organisation “has continued to be complicit in human rights abuses (and) in environmental devastation, (both of which are) reason enough why this partnership… shouldn’t continue”.

At the time of this article’s publication, no response from the accused parties had been released.