Prince Harry received some bad news regarding his security on Tuesday, May 23rd, exactly one week after he and his wife Meghan Markle and his mother-in-law Doria Ragland were involved in what he described as a “near catastrophic” car chase with the paparazzi in New York.
On Tuesday, the Duke of Sussex, 38, found out that he lost a bid to challenge the Home Office – which is responsible for policing, immigration and security – for a second time over their decision regarding his security when he visits the U.K. Prince Harry lost the right to the taxpayer-funded police protection that working members of the royal family are entitled to when he and Meghan, 41, stepped down as senior royals in 2020. Although he offered to fund the cost of the private security himself, the Home Office decided in February 2020 that he still wouldn’t be entitled to private police protection despite proposing to cover the cost himself, which is what led him to take legal action.
Prince Harry's Battle Over Police Protection
Prince Harry's lawyers asked a judge to let him proceed with a claim over decisions taken by the Home Office and the Executive Committee for the Protection of Royalty and Public Figures (Ravec), which protects high profile people such as the royal family and the British Prime Minister, for example, in December 2021 and February 2022. But when opposing Prince Harry's claim, the Home Office revealed that Ravec's conclusion was that the Metropolitan Police was not for hire, and it was "not appropriate" to let wealthy people "buy" police security when it had already been decided that "the public interest does not warrant" someone receiving such protection using taxpayer's money.
Prince Harry originally argued that the decision to forbid him from paying for his own private police protection was "procedurally unfair." He then applied for a judicial review based on his offer to pay for the security himself, which he claimed should have prompted the Home Office to "quash and retake" its decision.
Prince Harry's lawyers said the decision contradicted section 25(1) of the 1996 Police Act, which allows the "chief officer of the police" to provide special police services "subject to payment."
Justice Martin Chamberlain's Verdict
In his written judgement, Chamberlain wrote: "In my judgment, the short answer to this point is that Ravec did not say that it would be contrary to the public interest to allow wealthy individuals to pay for any police services. It can be taken to have understood that section 25(1), to which it referred, expressly envisages payment for some such services. Its reasoning was narrowly confined to the protective security services that fall within its remit."
"Those services are different in kind from the police services provided at (for example) sporting or entertainment events, because they involve the deployment of highly trained specialist officers, of whom there are a limited number, and who are required to put themselves in harm’s way to protect their principals," he continued. "Ravec’s reasoning was that there are policy reasons why those services should not be made available for payment, even though others are. I can detect nothing that is arguably irrational in that reasoning."
Prince Harry’s Appeal Over Original Ravec Decision
Despite having this latest claim to pay for police protection rejected, Prince Harry will still have the opportunity to appeal the original decision, taken by Ravec in February 2020, not to provide him with the same level of security after March 31st 2020 after he and Meghan announced that they would be stepping down as senior members i.e., working members of the royal family. The High Court gave the go ahead for this in July last year, and according to The Guardian in an article published on Tuesday, May 23rd, the case is currently awaiting trial.
