New legal setback for Prince Harry. While the youngest son of King Charles III and his wife Meghan lost their systematic police protection at the expense of the British taxpayer, after his withdrawal from the royal family in 2020, he challenged the authorities’ decision to grant protection to only one case per case upon returning to the UK. But British justice ruled against him on Wednesday.
The High Court in London ruled that the Home Office’s decision “was not irrational”, “was not tainted by injustice” and that the case-by-case approach adopted by the police thereafter “was, and it is legally founded.” He considered that her withdrawal from the royal family had changed his status.
This is the second legal defeat for the son of King Charles III over responsibility for his security when he visits the United Kingdom. In another proceeding concluded last May, the courts denied him the right to benefit from police protection by paying for it with his personal funds.
He fears for his safety and that of his family
The issue is sensitive for the prince, who still blames the press and paparazzi for the car accident that killed his mother, Princess Diana, in Paris in 1997. His rare trips to the United Kingdom in recent years, particularly for the his father’s coronation or visiting him after the announcement of his cancer, were also the subject of scrutiny by the media. Harry has also engaged in a legal crusade against the tabloids, with varying degrees of success.
In written testimony read during debates in early December, Prince Harry said his fears for his safety and that of his family prevented him from coming to the country more regularly. “I cannot put my wife in danger like that and, given what I have experienced, I am also reluctant to put myself in unnecessary danger,” he said.
VIDEO. Coronation of Charles III: Harry present but discreet, Andrew booed
His lawyer had argued that a case-by-case decision on his safety “creates excessive uncertainty” for the prince and those charged with his security. Home Office lawyer defended the Home Office’s decision to grant the Duke of Sussex “tailored” and “context-specific” protection around his travels around the UK, due to his “change in status” within the royal family.
The Home Office welcomed Wednesday’s High Court ruling, saying “the UK government’s safeguarding system is robust and proportionate”.
“Troublemaker. Typical travel fan. Food fanatic. Award-winning student. Organizer. Entrepreneur. Bacon specialist.”
