Another legal defeat for Prince Harry over responsibility for his

Another legal defeat for Prince Harry over responsibility for his safety in the UK

When Prince Harry traveled to the United Kingdom he believed he had the right to systematic police protection, but the British justice system found him wrong on Wednesday because his withdrawal from the royal family had changed his status.

• Also read: Donald Trump could deport Prince Harry if he becomes president again

• Also read: Prince Harry is “certain” that Charles III’s cancer the royal family can be reunited

• Also read: Prince Harry reaches financial deal with tabloid he sued

The Duke of Sussex, youngest son of King Charles III, and his wife Meghan lost their systematic protection from law enforcement at the expense of the British taxpayer after they decided to quit the royal family and settle in the United States in 2020.

But Prince Harry, who has rarely visited the UK in recent years, challenged the authorities' decision to now grant him protection on a case-by-case basis.

On Wednesday, the High Court in London ruled that this decision was “not irrational”, “not tainted by injustice” and that the case-by-case strategy now being pursued by the police “is and is legally justified”.

A spokesman for the Duke of Sussex indicated that he would appeal against this ruling, stressing that Harry was not claiming “preferential treatment” but only a “fair and lawful” application of the rules on the matter.

This is the second legal defeat for Prince Harry regarding his security during his visit to the UK. In another case concluded last May, the courts denied him the right to use police protection by paying him from personal funds.

The issue is sensitive for the prince because he blames the press and paparazzi for the car crash that killed his mother, Princess Diana, in Paris in 1997.

Also his trips to the United Kingdom – a handful in one year, for the coronation of Charles III. in May or early February to visit his cancer-stricken father – are under scrutiny from the media, even if they now adopt a more civilized attitude towards members of the royal family.

“Status change”

In a written testimony read out during debates in early December, which were largely held behind closed doors due to the sensitive security information mentioned, Harry reiterated that his fears for his safety and that of his family prevented him from visiting the country more regularly.

“I cannot put my wife in danger in this way, and given my experiences, I am also hesitant to put myself in danger unnecessarily,” he said.

His lawyer had argued that a case-by-case decision about his safety “leads to undue uncertainty” for the prince and those tasked with his security.

The Home Office lawyer defended the Home Office's decision to provide the Duke of Sussex with “tailored” and “context-dependent” protection in relation to his travels in the UK due to his “change of status” within the royal family.

With his departure in 2020, the Duke of Sussex is no longer an active member of the royal family, unlike the King, Queen Camilla or, for example, his brother Prince William and his wife Kate.

The Home Office welcomed the Supreme Court's decision and said the UK government's protection system was strict and proportionate.

In the dispute with his family, against whom he made increasing attacks in his memoirs and a documentary that aired on Netflix in 2022, Prince Harry also waged a legal campaign against the tabloids, with more or less success.

Last December, the courts convicted the editor of the tabloid The Mirror for obtaining information by hacking into the prince or his entourage's messaging system or through other illegal processes.

However, in January, Harry dropped a libel case against the publisher of the Mail on Sunday, which he had attacked over a 2022 article about his police protection.