Prince Harry loses bid for second legal challenge against Home Office over UK police protection

Watch more of our videos on ShotsTV.com 
and on Freeview 262 or Freely 565
Visit Shots! now

This article contains affiliate links. We may earn a small commission on items purchased through this article, but that does not affect our editorial judgement.

Prince Harry has lost his bid to challenge the Home Office over his UK security arrangements.

Prince Harry has lost his bid for a second legal challenge against the Home Office over his UK security arrangements. The Duke of Sussex was seeking approval from the High Court to secure a judicial review over a decision which declared he should not be allowed to pay privately for his protective security.

In February 2020, the Home Office - which is responsible for security, policing and immigration - decided the Duke of Sussex would no longer receive personal police security while in Britain, even if he were to cover the expense himself.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

Last year, the High Court agreed Prince Harry should be allowed to challenge the original decision to end the protection. But now, the court has ruled the prince can not seek a judicial review over whether he can pay for the specialist police officers himself.

Earlier this month, a judge was asked at a hearing by Harry’s legal team to allow the royal to bring a case over decisions taken by the Home Office and the Executive Committee for the Protection of Royalty and Public Figures (Ravec) in December 2021 and February 2022.

Prince HarryPrince Harry
Prince Harry | AFP via Getty Images

Opposing Harry’s claim, the Home Office said Ravec considered it was "not appropriate" for wealthy people to "buy" protective security when it had decided that "the public interest does not warrant" someone receiving such protection funded by the public.

According to Sky News, lawyers for the Met Police said Ravec had been "reasonable" in finding "it is wrong for a policing body to place officers in harm’s way upon payment of a fee by a private individual".

Comment Guidelines

National World encourages reader discussion on our stories. User feedback, insights and back-and-forth exchanges add a rich layer of context to reporting. Please review our Community Guidelines before commenting.

Follow us
©National World Publishing Ltd. All rights reserved.Cookie SettingsTerms and ConditionsPrivacy notice