The Duke of Sussex has lost a legal challenge over the level of taxpayer-funded security he is entitled to while in the UK, allowing the government to proceed with a 'bespoke' and cheaper level of protection for his family. Three senior judges at the Court of Appeal rejected Prince Harry's claim that he had been 'singled out' for 'inferior treatment' and that his safety and life were 'at stake' after a change in security arrangements that occurred when he stepped down as a working royal and moved abroad.
Sir Geoffrey Vos, the Master of the Rolls, stated: 'I concluded, having studied the detailed documents, I could not say the duke's sense of grievance translated into a legal argument for a challenge to Ravec's decision.' The ruling will be a personal blow to Harry, who said he was 'overwhelmed' by the case when he flew back for the two-day hearing last month. Speaking to a Daily Telegraph reporter outside the hearing, he suggested he considered the appeal more important than his other legal battle against tabloids, saying 'this one always mattered the most'.
Barristers for Harry argued that the Executive Committee for the Protection of Royalty and Public Figures (Ravec) did not follow its own 'terms of reference' when deciding his security. Shaheed Fatima KC said his safety, security and life were 'at stake', and that the 'human dimension' of the case should not be forgotten. The Home Office, which is legally responsible for Ravec's decisions, opposed the appeal. Sir James Eadie KC, for the Home Office, said Ravec was faced with a 'unique set of circumstances'.
In a ruling on Friday, Vos, Lord Justice Bean and Lord Justice Edis dismissed Harry's appeal. Reading a summary of the decision, Vos said: 'The Duke was in effect stepping in and out of the cohort of protection provided by Ravec. Outside the UK, he was outside the cohort, but when in the UK, his security would be considered as appropriate.' He continued: 'It was impossible to say that this reasoning was illogical or inappropriate, indeed it seemed sensible.'
A High Court judge ruled last year that Ravec's decision, taken in early 2020 after Harry and Meghan stepped down as senior working royals, was lawful. Ravec's final decision stated that Metropolitan police protection would no longer be appropriate after the Sussexes' departure, and that they should receive a different degree of protection when in the UK. The Sussexes would instead receive a 'bespoke' security service, whereby they would be required to give 30 days' notice of any plans to travel to the UK, with each visit being assessed for threat levels and whether protection is needed.
Harry could appeal, but would need permission to do so, according to legal commentator Joshua Rozenberg. A Home Office spokesperson said: 'The UK government's protective security system is rigorous and proportionate.'
