Prince Harry’s legal fight for UK security ‘has already cost tax payers £300,000’
Duke of Sussex was granted a High Court challenge against decision not to give his family police protection when in the UK
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.Taxpayers have forked out nearly £300,000 for Prince Harry’s legal battle with the government over his police protection in the UK, it has been reported.
A February 2020 ruling said the Duke of Sussex and his family would not be afforded the same level of protection while in the UK.
It came after Harry and Meghan, the Duchess of Sussex, announced that they were stepping back from their duties in the Royal Family and would move abroad.
In July, Harry was granted permission to bring a High Court challenge against the Home Office over his security arrangements while visiting the UK.
He requested a review of the decision to not allow him to pay for police protection for himself and his family while visiting from the US after being told UK police were not “guns for hire”.
The government has so far spent £296,882 on the case, according to Freedom of Information figures obtained by The Sun.
A source told the paper: “He claims not to want taxpayers to foot the bill for his guards — but they are being made to pay hundreds of thousands for his court case.”
The duke’s challenge concerns the February 2020 decision of the Executive Committee for the Protection of Royalty and Public Figures (RAVEC) over his security, after he was told he would no longer be given the “same degree” of personal protective security when visiting the UK,
His legal team argued that the security arrangements, set out in a letter from RAVEC, and their application when he visited the UK in June 2021, were invalid due to “procedural unfairness” because he was not given an opportunity to make “informed representations beforehand”.
Shaeed Fatima QC, for Harry, told the court at the time that the duke “didn’t know at that stage that the Royal Household was involved at all... he was told it was an independent decision.”
However, lawyers for the Home Office say RAVEC was entitled to reach its decision that Harry’s security arrangements would be considered on a “case by case” basis, and argued that permission for a full judicial review should be refused.
Sir James Eadie QC, representing the Home Office, said in written arguments that any tensions between Harry and the Royal Household officials were “irrelevant” to his change in security status.
It was unclear whether the case would be resolved before the coronation of Harry’s father, King Charles, on 6 May.
The Sussexes have not yet confirmed whether or not they will attend the event.
A government spokesperson said: “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.
“It would not be appropriate to comment on ongoing legal proceedings.”