Prince Harry has lost a legal challenge over a decision to downgrade the taxpayer-funded security he and his family will receive during their visits to the U.K.
In a ruling issued Friday, May 2, an appeals court in London upheld a U.K. High Court decision from last February that stated the Executive Committee for the Protection of Royalty and Public Figures (RAVEC) was allowed to downgrade the protection status for the Duke of Sussex and his family. The new arrangement will allow the U.K. government to provide Harry, Meghan Markle, and their children with a “bespoke” level of protection: They will have to provide advanced notice of their visits, and security will be assigned based on things like travel plans and a threat level assessment.
RAVEC — which authorizes security for senior royals on behalf of the Home Office — changed the protection status for the Duke of Sussex in February 2020, after Harry and Markle stepped away from their royal family duties and left the U.K. for Canada (before later settling in California). RAVEC said that if Harry and his family were only going to visit the U.K. occasionally, their security detail could be assessed on a case by case basis.
Harry, who has long made privacy and safety a key issue for him and his family, quickly challenged the ruling. He and his legal team argued that RAVEC failed to properly consider his circumstances and conduct a risk assessment when they made the decision in 2020.
At a hearing on the appeal last month, Harry’s lawyer, Shaheed Fatima, said the “bespoke” security offering was not “better,” and suggested the Duke was being “singled out for different, unjustified, and inferior treatment.” Fatima also argued that Harry was not seeking the same level of protection as working members of the royal family, but rather a fair process in deciding so.
In the appeals decision, one of the judges acknowledged that Harry had made ‘powerful and moving arguments, and that it was plain that the Duke of Sussex felt badly treated by the system.” But the judge ultimately cast doubt on whether Harry’s “sense of grievance translated into a legal argument for the challenge to RAVEC’s decision.”
Ultimately, the appeals court said that Sir Richard Mottram, the (now former) head of RAVEC who had decided to downgrade Harry’s security, acted properly, even if he technically did not follow the usual procedures for conducting a full review of the Duke’s situation.
The court ultimately ruled that RAVEC gave “compelling reasons” for making its decision: “The Duke was, in effect, stepping in and out of the short of protection provided by RAVEC,” a summary of the ruling states. “Outside the U.K., he was outside that cohort, but when in the U.K., his security would be considered as appropriate depending on the circumstances. It was impossible to say that this reasoning was illogical or inappropriate. Indeed, it seemed sensible.”
Representatives for Harry did not immediately return Rolling Stone’s request for comment.
#Prince #Harry #Loses #Appeal #Decision #Downgrade #U.K #Security
