Duke challenges UK’s bespoke safety plan, claiming risks to his life and unfair treatment compared to other individuals
Prince Harry has insisted that his personal safety is in jeopardy as he appeals a decision that altered his security provision in the United Kingdom following his withdrawal from royal duties and subsequent relocation abroad.
Appearing in court for a second consecutive day, the Duke of Sussex contested the conclusion reached by Ravec — the Executive Committee for the Protection of Royalty and Public Figures — which determined that his protection should differ from standard arrangements offered to those still serving the monarchy.
His legal representatives argue that Ravec bypassed a crucial step by not consulting the designated risk management board, instead crafting what they referred to as a “bespoke” framework, which the duke perceives as substandard and unjust when compared to the approach used for others in similar circumstances.
Addressing the court, barrister Shaheed Fatima KC emphasised the stakes involved: “Let’s not lose sight of the human element in this appeal. The individual seated behind me is fighting not only for fair treatment but for his safety and, ultimately, his life.”
Fatima stated that Harry’s active presence in court underlined the profound personal impact of the decision on both him and his family.
In defence, the Home Office maintained that the tailored arrangement was not only appropriate but advantageous, given Harry’s distinct public and private position. Sir James Eadie KC explained that the flexible system allowed for nuanced judgement on a case-by-case basis — a structure seen as more suitable for the duke’s current lifestyle.
He dismissed the claim that failing to involve the risk board amounted to a breach, arguing that Ravec’s framework was never intended to function with rigid procedural obligations. Eadie also underscored the qualifications of Sir Richard Mottram, Ravec’s former chair, as evidence of the thoroughness of the decision-making process.
Harry is not seeking reinstatement of his former security levels as a working royal, but instead wants to be assessed using the same standard protocols applied to anyone else considered for protection. His legal team contends that he has been unfairly singled out for a lesser model of safeguarding without sufficient justification.
An earlier high court judgement in 2023 found Ravec’s decision to be lawful. The duke’s lawyers now claim that ruling was flawed and warrants review.
Part of the latest hearing was conducted behind closed doors due to confidentiality requirements. During a brief pause in the session, a member of the public voiced vocal support for Harry, accusing the press of driving his departure from the UK.
The panel of judges — Sir Geoffrey Vos, Lord Justice Bean and Lord Justice Edis — have deferred their final verdict to a later date.
