Prince Harry has lost a High Court challenge against the Home Office over a decision to change security arrangements for himself and his family when they are in the UK.
The Duke of Sussex challenged a February 2020 decision of the Executive Committee for the Protection of Royalty and Public Figures (Ravec) after being told he would no longer be given the "same degree" of personal protective security when visiting after moving abroad.
Harry's lawyers say he was "singled out" and treated "less favourably" in the decision, arguing a failure to carry out a risk analysis and fully consider the impact of a "successful attack" on him meant the approach to his protection was "unlawful and unfair".
He is set to appeal against the High Court ruling, a spokesperson said. The court heard the duke believes his children cannot "feel at home” in the UK if it is "not possible to keep them safe” there.
Some royals get around-the-clock security funded by the taxpayer - namely King Charles and Queen Camilla, Prince William and Princess Kate, along with their three children.
Meghan Markle 'to unleash her own memoirs' as Prince Harry's drops next week
Meanwhile, Princess Anne, Prince Edward and Sophie, the Duchess of Edinburgh do not have full-time security - but they are guarded on public engagements or when carrying out official duties.
Meanwhile, Prince Andrew lost his state-funded security when he stepped down from royal duties in 2019, and granddaughters Zara Tindall, Princesses Beatrice and Eugenie do not receive security as they are not working royals.
Beatrice and Eugenie did once have police protection, at an annual cost of £500,000, but it was stripped by the late Queen in 2011 amid a row over the cost. It is thought King Charles highlighted it as an issue after the younger of his nieces racked up huge security costs as she travelled the world during her gap year.
Prince Andrew was said to be furious about his daughters losing their taxpayer-funded security (PA)The level of protection given to royals is based on a threat assessment conducted by the Joint Terrorism Analysis Centre, The Times reports. The Home Office says Ravec was entitled to reach the decision it did, which is that Harry’s security arrangements will be considered on a case-by-case basis.
Instead, the level of security would be arranged depending on the perceived risk, as it is with other high-profile visiting officials. An earlier hearing heard how Prince Harry raised issues of "procedural unfairness" in how senior members of the Royal Household were part of the Ravec committee.
This included Sir Edward Young, private secretary to the late Queen Elizabeth. Prince Harry's lawyers highlighted tensions between Sir Edward and the prince and argued that as a result, the royal official should not have been part of the decision-making.
Sir Edward Young was the long-time private secretary of the late Queen and also worked for Charles for a short period after he became monarch. He faced some stern criticism in the Duke of Sussex's controversial memoir Spare - and he gives him the unflattering nickname of "The Bee".
Emma Probert was made a Member of the Royal Victorian Order by the Prince of Wales (PA)
Camilla accompanied by her female Police Protection Officer (Getty Images)In the book, Harry claims that after the birth of Archie, he had a long tea with the late Queen and he says she was appalled by the abuse that his new family were receiving. He claims she vowed to send Sir Edward to speak to them - and he sat down to hear a detailed presentation from the couple at Frogmore Cottage.
Harry writes: "The Bee was oval-faced and fuzzy and tended to glide around with great equanimity and poise as if he was a boon to all living things. He was so poised that people didn't fear him. Big mistake. Sometimes their last mistake."
The book says the aide took meticulous notes and claimed the deluge of hate and lies was unprecedented in British history and promised to discuss the matter with the appropriate people and deliver solutions. But Harry alleges they never heard from him again.
Harry and Meghan convinced 'royals were against them' after New Year photo snub
Elsewhere in the book, Harry also says Sir Edward tried to prevent him from seeing his late grandmother shortly before he and Meghan quit as working royals and blamed him for the loss of his police protection after he moved to the United States.
Sir Edward Young, right, former private secretary to the Queen, passed on the Queen's wish for the security to continue (WPA Pool)Court documents revealed Sir Edward Young told a Home Office committee that keeping the Sussexes safe was “of paramount importance to Her Majesty and her family” as he argued they should be allowed to keep it.
The late Queen Elizabeth II felt it was "imperative” that the Duke and Duchess of Sussex kept "effective security” after stepping back, court documents have revealed.
Sir Edward Young wrote to Sir Mark Sedwill, the then Cabinet Secretary, to explain the late Monarch's view, and it was published in court documents.
The JTAC collates intelligence from security services in Britain, the US, Canada, Australia and New Zealand - known as the 'Five Eyes partnership' - and then passes on recommendations to the Royal and VIP Executive Committee (Ravec), who has members of the royal household along with police, counter-terrorism specialists and civil servants.
Scotland Yard provides automatic protection to only the most senior royals and members of the Government, such as the Prime Minister, but the force will also offer protection for any individual who faces a big enough risk, according to the newspaper.
Simon Morgan, former royal protection officer, previously spoke out about one of the biggest challenges while he looked after Princes William and Harry when they were younger.
He said: “We would ask them about their plans for the weekend and like a lot of young people they would say 'Dunno yet, waiting on a call’.
Simon added that they would get a phone call and tell him they were going out but didn't know where so guards were wandering around with them not knowing 100% where they were going. Simon said that the main threats to the royals are anti-monarchists, protesters and "fixated individuals who want to do harm" adding the "only have to get it right once’.
Read more similar news:
Comments:
comments powered by Disqus
