Harry’s security arrangements changed after he gave up being a “working royal.” The Home Office in 2020 decided that Harry would not receive the level of personal police protection in Britain usually afforded to senior members of the royal family, even if he were to pay for it out of his own pocket.
On Tuesday, a judge ruled that Harry’s request for a judicial review of an earlier rejection of his offer to cover the costs would not be allowed.
At a hearing last week, Harry’s lawyers said that he should be allowed to challenge a decision by the executive committee for the protection of royalty and public figures — also known as Ravec — that people should not be allowed to make financial contributions for their own police security. Lawyers for the Home Office said that Ravec’s position was that wealthy people should not be allowed to “buy” police protection.
The media interest in Harry and his family remains huge. Last week, Harry and Meghan, Duchess of Sussex, and her mother, Doria Ragland, were involved in what their spokesperson described as a “near catastrophic” car chase in New York City. Harry’s mother, Princess Diana, died in a 1997 car crash in Paris while being chased by paparazzi.
Harry has traveled to the U.K. a number of times since moving to California, most recently for the coronation of his father. British police have provided security for Harry on a case-by-case basis, but it is not at the level it was when he was a working member of the royal family.
Harry is currently embroiled in multiple legal battles in Britain. Last summer, he was granted permission to bring a challenge against the U.K. government to review its decision to take away his state security. That hearing has yet to be heard.
He is also suing the publishers of three of the largest tabloids over claims they hacked his phones and invaded his privacy. The fifth-in-line to the throne is widely expected to appear in the witness box early next month.