Prince Harry’s lawyers have spoken out after the Prince lost his legal challenge against the Home Office over his right to be granted automatic police protection. They said the royal plans to appeal the decision by the High Court.
Retired High Court judge Sir Peter Lane delivered his verdict today, February 28, following a hearing in December, with the court finding that there was no unlawfulness in the decision reached to strip him of his taxpayer-funded security.
The judge found that “any departure from policy was justified and that the decision was not irrational or marred by procedural unfairness”.
In response, a legal spokesperson for the Duke of Sussex said: “The Duke of Sussex will appeal today’s judgment which refuses his judicial review claim against the decision-making body Ravec, which includes the Home Office, the Royal Household and the Met Police.
“Although these are not labels used by Ravec, three categories – as revealed during the litigation – comprise the ‘Ravec cohort’: the Role Based Category, the Occasional Category and the Other VIP Category.
“The Duke is not asking for preferential treatment, but for a fair and lawful application of Ravec’s own rules, ensuring that he receives the same consideration as others in accordance with Ravec’s own written policy.
“In February 2020, Ravec failed to apply its written policy to the Duke of Sussex and excluded him from a particular risk analysis. The Duke’s case is that the so-called ‘bespoke process’ that applies to him, is no substitute for that risk analysis.
“The Duke of Sussex hopes he will obtain justice from the Court of Appeal, and makes no further comment while the case is ongoing.”
The Duke of Sussex brought a case against the Home Office after the Executive Committee for the Protection of Royalty and Public Figures (Ravec) ruled in February 2020 that he should receive a different level of protection when he is in the UK.
Harry and his wife Meghan Markle moved to the US after quitting as working royals and the Prince has since expressed concern that his family are at risk if he brings them to the UK due to the loss of his security.
His lawyers previously told the court that he was “singled out” and treated “less favourably” in the decision, adding that the failure to carry out a risk assessment to understand the impact of a potential attack on him was “unlawful and unfair”.
The High Court has ruled that they could not grant Harry any relief even if such “unfairness” occured as the outcome of his claim would likely not have been substantially different.
Instead the Duke and Duchess will have their security arranged depending on the perceived risk to their safety, as it is with other high-profile visiting dignitaries.
The Government has continued to call for Hary’s claim to be dismissed, arguing that Ravec – which falls under the Home Office’s remit – was entitled to conclude his protection should be considered on a “case-by-case” basis.
Home Office lawyers said the Duke was no longer a member of the group of people whose “security position” was under regular review by Ravec, but he was “brought back within the cohort in the appropriate circumstances”.
Upon hearing the ruling a spokesperson for the Home Office said: “We are pleased that the Court has found in favour of the Government’s position in this case, and we are carefully considering our next steps. It would be inappropriate to comment further.
“The UK Government’s protective security system is rigorous and proportionate. It is our long-standing policy not to provide detailed information on those arrangements, as doing so could compromise their integrity and affect individuals’ security.”
The Duke was not present in court as the verdict was heard, as he now lives in Montecito, California with Meghan and their two children Prince Archie and Princess Lilibet.
The family are tipped to travel to the UK in May for a celebratory service at St Paul’s Cathedral to mark 10 years of the Invictus Games.