Current:Home > NewsPrince Harry loses legal bid to regain special police protection in U.K., even at his own expense -FundPrime
Prince Harry loses legal bid to regain special police protection in U.K., even at his own expense
Charles H. Sloan View
Date:2025-04-10 16:55:13
London — Prince Harry has lost a bid to bring a legal challenge against the U.K. government over its refusal to allow him to pay privately for personal police protection for himself and his family when the estranged royals visit Britain.
Harry and his wife Meghan, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex, gave up their roles as senior "working" members of the royal family in 2020, soon after which they settled in California. That year, the Executive Committee for the Protection of Royalty and Public Figures (RAVEC), made up of officials from the government, London's Metropolitan Police Service and the royal household, decided the Sussexes no longer qualified for special police protection in the U.K.
Harry had argued through his lawyers at Britain's High Court that a formal judicial review process should assess the government's decision to refuse his offer to have the personal protection order restored at his expense.
"RAVEC has exceeded its authority, its power, because it doesn't have the power to make this decision in the first place," Harry's lawyers told the court, according to CBS News' partner network BBC News.
In a written judgment on Tuesday, however, High Court Justice Martin Chamberlain denied Harry permission to bring a judicial review over RAVEC's decision, describing the committee's actions as "narrowly confined to the protective security services that fall within its remit."
Harry's legal team had argued in court that there were provisions in U.K. law that allowed for private payment for "special police services," and as such, "payment for policing is not inconsistent with the public interest or public confidence in the Metropolitan Police Service," according to the BBC.
In his ruling, Chamberlain also rejected that argument, saying the security services Harry was seeking were "different in kind from the police services provided at (for example) sporting or entertainment events, because they involve the deployment of highly trained specialist officers, of whom there are a limited number, and who are required to put themselves in harm's way to protect their principals."
"RAVEC's reasoning was that there are policy reasons why those services should not be made available for payment, even though others are. I can detect nothing that is arguably irrational in that reasoning," Chamberlain wrote.
While the Duke of Sussex has lost his bid to legally challenge RAVEC's decision on whether he can pay personally for police protection, there remains a separate, ongoing legal case about whether the prince should have his state security restored. Prince Harry was granted permission from the courts to proceed with that case and it is expected to come to trial, but the timing remains unclear.
The cases about his personal protection when he visits Britain are just two of the legal battles Prince Harry is currently fighting.
The duke is also part of a small group of celebrities alleging unlawful information gathering by Britain's tabloid press. Harry and Meghan have filed at least seven lawsuits against U.S. and U.K. media outlets since 2019, according to the U.K.'s Sky News.
- In:
- Prince Harry Duke of Sussex
- Britain
- Meghan Duchess of Sussex
- United Kingdom
veryGood! (1)
Related
- McConnell absent from Senate on Thursday as he recovers from fall in Capitol
- Charged Lemonade at Panera Bread gets warning label after death of college student
- Charlie Puth's tribute to Matthew Perry with 'Friends' theme song moves fans: Watch here
- Indonesian police arrest 59 suspected militants over an alleged plot to disrupt 2024 elections
- Off the Grid: Sally breaks down USA TODAY's daily crossword puzzle, Triathlon
- Magic Johnson becomes the 4th athlete billionaire, according to Forbes
- Kirk Cousins injury updates: Vikings QB confirmed to have suffered torn Achilles
- Southern California wildfire prompts evacuation order for thousands as Santa Ana winds fuel flames
- Which apps offer encrypted messaging? How to switch and what to know after feds’ warning
- Chinese factory activity contracts in October as pandemic recovery falters
Ranking
- DoorDash steps up driver ID checks after traffic safety complaints
- Lions vs. Raiders Monday Night Football highlights: Rookie Jahmyr Gibbs has breakout game
- UN experts call on the Taliban to free 2 women rights defenders from custody in Afghanistan
- A 16-year-old is arrested in the fatal shooting of a Rocky Mountain College student-athlete
- Gen. Mark Milley's security detail and security clearance revoked, Pentagon says
- Actor Robert De Niro tells a jury in a lawsuit by his ex-assistant: ‘This is all nonsense’
- Stellantis, UAW reach tentative deal on new contract, sources say
- What does 'The Exorcist' tell us about evil? A priest has some ideas
Recommendation
Highlights from Trump’s interview with Time magazine
Scream time: Has your kid been frightened by a horror movie trailer?
Biden’s Cabinet secretaries will push a divided Congress to send aid to Israel and Ukraine
After parents report nail in Halloween candy, Wisconsin police urge caution
The Daily Money: Spending more on holiday travel?
Autoworkers are the latest to spotlight the power of US labor. What is the state of unions today?
Pharmacists prescribe another round of US protests to highlight working conditions
Veterans are more likely than most to kill themselves with guns. Families want to keep them safe.