Prince Harry Loses Appeal Over UK Security Request/ Newslooks/ WASHINGTON/ J. Mansour/ Morning Edition/ Prince Harry has lost his appeal to restore publicly funded police protection while visiting the U.K., following his departure from royal duties. A London appeals court ruled the government acted lawfully in reviewing his security on a case-by-case basis. The decision leaves Harry liable for significant legal fees and further complicates his efforts to secure protection.
Prince Harry Loses Appeal Over UK Security: Quick Looks
- U.K. appeals court upholds ruling denying Harry government-funded security
- The court found no unfair treatment in case-by-case security review
- Harry left royal duties in 2020 and moved to the U.S. with Meghan
- His legal team argued he remains at risk due to media threats
- Government maintained bespoke security plan was lawful and justified
- Harry now faces paying the government’s legal costs in addition to his own
- Court previously denied his attempt to pay privately for police protection
- Harry has ongoing legal battles with UK tabloids over privacy violations
Deep Look: Prince Harry’s Appeal Rejected in Security Dispute With UK Government
LONDON — Prince Harry has lost his legal appeal challenging the U.K. government’s decision to revoke his state-funded police protection, a major setback in his ongoing efforts to secure official security during visits to his homeland.
The Court of Appeal ruled Friday that the Royal and VIP Executive Committee (RAVEC) acted lawfully in deciding to assess Harry’s protection needs on a case-by-case basis, rather than providing blanket security. The decision upholds a previous ruling by the High Court, which had found the government’s approach neither unlawful nor unjustified.
Legal Defeat and Financial Consequences
The court’s unanimous ruling also likely leaves the Duke of Sussex responsible for both his legal team’s fees and the government’s, raising the financial toll of his legal battle. Harry has not yet indicated whether he plans to escalate the case to the U.K. Supreme Court.
“This appeal means everything to him and his family,” said Harry’s lawyer, Shaheed Fatima, during the hearing, describing the committee’s decision as a manifestly inferior process.
Government lawyer James Eadie, however, dismissed Harry’s arguments, saying they relied on selective interpretations and ignored the full context of the case.
A Break from Royal Convention
Harry and Meghan, Duchess of Sussex, stepped back from their royal duties in 2020 and relocated to the United States. Since then, Harry has pursued an unprecedented legal path, frequently challenging both the U.K. government and tabloid media in court.
The security dispute has drawn wide attention, particularly as Harry cited serious threats, including an al-Qaida-linked document encouraging his assassination and a high-profile paparazzi pursuit in New York City last year.
Despite these risks, a Home Office committee determined in 2020 that there was “no basis for publicly funded security” for the couple while in Britain.
No Private Police Allowed
In a related loss, Harry also failed to secure permission to pay for police protection out of pocket. The court previously ruled that allowing individuals to hire official police officers could set a dangerous precedent, effectively turning elite law enforcement into a “private bodyguard service for the wealthy.”
Harry’s legal challenges have sometimes succeeded. In 2023, he won a landmark lawsuit against the Daily Mirror’s publisher for widespread phone hacking. In January 2025, Rupert Murdoch’s U.K. media group issued a rare public apology and agreed to pay damages to settle a privacy case brought by the prince.
However, this latest ruling marks a significant legal and personal defeat, as Harry continues to fight for what he sees as necessary protection for his family.
What’s Next?
Harry has another case pending against the Daily Mail’s publisher over alleged privacy violations. Meanwhile, his latest court loss may force him to rely on private security arrangements that don’t have the same authority as U.K. police.
Whether he appeals to the Supreme Court remains to be seen. For now, though, the court’s decision signals that even a royal cannot override the government’s authority on public protection matters.
You must Register or Login to post a comment.