Home Office ‘should have considered impact on UK of successful attack on Prince Harry’

Get the free Morning Headlines email for news from our reporters across the world

Sign up to our free Morning Headlines email

The Home Office should have taken greater heed to the impact on the UK’s reputation if a successful attack on Prince Harry were to take place, Prince Harry’s lawyers have argued.

The Duke of Sussex is challenging the UK government’s decision to strip him of security when he moved to US, one of five legal cases he has in the High Court.

A High Court judge heard on Tuesday that the duke is “plainly” part of the group that Ravec – the Executive Committee for the Protection of Royalty and Public Figures – has to consider.

Shaheed Fatima KC, for Harry, said: “The claimant’s consistent position has been – and remains – that he should be given state security in light of the threats/risks he faces.”

The duke also accused Ravec of acting “irrationally” and failing to follow its own written policies in changing the “same degree” of personal security previously afforded to him as a working royal.

At the start of the Duke’s legal challenge over the decision to change the level of his protective security when visiting the UK, his barrister Shaheed Fatima KC said: “This case is about the right to safety and security of a person, there could not be a right of greater importance to any of us.”

Harry is taking action against the Home Office over the February 2020 decision of the Executive Committee for the Protection of Royalty and Public Figures (Ravec) over his security, after being told he would no longer be given the “same degree” of personal protective security when visiting.

In written submissions, his barrister said: “Ravec should have considered the ‘impact’ that a successful attack on the claimant would have, bearing in mind his status, background and profile within the royal family – which he was born into and which he will have for the rest of his life – and his ongoing charity work and service to the public.

“Ravec should have considered, in particular, the impact on the UK’s reputation of a successful attack on the claimant.”

Mr Justice Lane heard that the duke had not been given an opportunity to make representations to Ravec before the decision was made, and that he was “entitled to be informed” of the relevant policies applied in order to make “informed submissions”.

The duke was cleared to bring the challenge in July 2022 and the claim will be heard over two-and-a-half days starting from Tuesday.

However, the majority of the hearing will be heard behind closed doors, after a a privacy order was issued over concerns that a vast amount of the evidential material cannot enter the public domain.

In making the bid for the challenge, lawyers for Harry said the security arrangements set out in a letter from Ravec, and their application when he visited the UK in June 2021, were invalid due to “procedural unfairness” because he was not given an opportunity to make “informed representations beforehand”.

Shaheed Fatima KC, for the duke, told the High Court in London last year: “He didn’t know at that stage that the Royal Household was involved at all… he was told it was an independent decision.”

More follows