Prince Harry’s legal challenge against the UK government’s decision to withdraw his taxpayer-funded security has been dismissed by the Court of Appeal. This ruling, made unanimously on Friday, confirms that a committee did not act unfairly in evaluating Harry’s security needs on a case-by-case basis each time he visits the UK.
Justice Geoffrey Vos delivered a comprehensive ruling, stating that while Harry feels he has been treated poorly, this sentiment does not provide sufficient legal grounds to contest the decision regarding his security provision. Vos acknowledged the Duke of Sussex’s concerns, suggesting that stepping back from royal duties has indeed led to a tailored yet reduced level of protection compared to when he was in the UK. Despite this, such circumstances do not establish a legal complaint.
The decision may result in significant legal costs for Harry, potentially leaving him liable for both the government’s legal fees and those of his own legal team. There is uncertainty surrounding whether he will pursue an appeal to the UK Supreme Court.
This ruling supports a previous High Court judgement affirming that the bespoke security plan for Harry was lawful and justified. During a rare courtroom appearance, Harry’s lawyer contended that his life is at risk and claimed the Royal and VIP Executive Committee has subjected him to inferior treatment. The attorney highlighted the personal implications of the appeal, noting Harry’s presence demonstrated its significance to him and his family.
A government lawyer rebutted Harry’s arguments, suggesting they were flawed and restricted in scope, misunderstanding key aspects of the situation. Since stepping back from royal duties in 2020, Harry and Meghan, Duchess of Sussex, have expressed concerns about inadequate protection from the royal institution. Following their departure, a Home Office committee concluded that there was no justification for publicly funded security for the couple within the UK.
Harry has asserted that both he and his family face threats during their visits to Britain, citing the aggressive social media hostility aimed at him and Meghan, as well as aggressive media attention. His lawyer noted at least two recent serious security incidents, including threats from extremist groups and perilous encounters with paparazzi.
The Duke, the younger son of King Charles III, is not new to legal battles involving the government and media, with a mixed outcome thus far. He previously lost a case aimed at allowing him to privately fund police protection in the UK, deemed unsuitable for a government service. However, he recently achieved a significant legal victory against the Daily Mirror, which involved a judge confirming extensive phone hacking practices, alongside a notable apology from Rupert Murdoch’s tabloids for long-standing privacy violations, resulting in substantial compensation for Harry.
A similar case against the Daily Mail is also pending, as he continues to navigate the complexities of privacy and security as a high-profile individual no longer serving in royal duties.