Current:Home > MyPrince Harry loses legal bid to regain special police protection in U.K., even at his own expense -EquityExchange
Prince Harry loses legal bid to regain special police protection in U.K., even at his own expense
EchoSense View
Date:2025-04-08 15:28:06
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! (2198)
Related
- Finally, good retirement news! Southwest pilots' plan is a bright spot, experts say
- Bill Belichick to join ESPN's 'ManningCast' as regular guest, according to report
- Harvey Weinstein's 2020 Rape Conviction Overturned by Appeals Court
- US applications for jobless claims fall to lowest level in 9 weeks
- Sonya Massey's father decries possible release of former deputy charged with her death
- Trump will be in NY for the hush money trial while the Supreme Court hears his immunity case in DC
- Anne Heche's son struggling to pay estate debts following 2022 death after car crash
- New airline rules will make it easier to get refunds for canceled flights. Here's what to know.
- Global Warming Set the Stage for Los Angeles Fires
- 2024 NFL mock draft roundup: Where is Georgia TE Brock Bowers predicted to go?
Ranking
- Elon Musk's skyrocketing net worth: He's the first person with over $400 billion
- Senators demand accounting of rapid closure plan for California prison where women were abused
- Florida man charged with murdering girlfriend’s 13-year-old daughter
- Off the Grid: Sally breaks down USA TODAY's daily crossword puzzle, Change of Plans
- Krispy Kreme offers a free dozen Grinch green doughnuts: When to get the deal
- Maine sheriff’s fate rests with governor after commissioners call for his firing
- 2024 NFL Draft rumors: Jayden Daniels' 'dream world' team, New York eyeing trade for QB
- Review: Zendaya's 'Challengers' serves up saucy melodrama – and some good tennis, too
Recommendation
NHL in ASL returns, delivering American Sign Language analysis for Deaf community at Winter Classic
County in rural New Mexico extends agreement with ICE for immigrant detention amid criticism
Hyundai recalls 31,440 Genesis vehicles for fuel pump issue: Here's which cars are affected
Maple Leafs' Sheldon Keefe: Bruins' Brad Marchand 'elite' at getting away with penalties
Apple iOS 18.2: What to know about top features, including Genmoji, AI updates
No one is above the law. Supreme Court will decide if that includes Trump while he was president
U.S. orders cow testing for bird flu after grocery milk tests positive
Judge orders anonymous jury for trial of self-exiled Chinese businessman, citing his past acts