The Duke of Sussex is locked in a high-stakes legal battle, arguing his security arrangements in the UK are inadequate and place his life at risk. The core of the dispute centers around decisions made by the Executive Committee for the Protection of Royalty and Public Figures (Ravec) regarding his protection detail.
Harry’s legal team contends he faces inherent security risks stemming from his birth order – sixth in line to the throne – and amplified by his military service, including two deployments to Afghanistan. These factors, they argue, create a lifelong threat that demands a consistent and robust security presence.
Prior to stepping back from royal duties in 2020, Prince Harry and his family enjoyed the same full-time police protection afforded to the most senior members of the Royal Family. Following his move, Ravec implemented a “bespoke” security arrangement, requiring 30 days’ notice for any UK visits and individual threat assessments for each trip.
This new system proved problematic. During a recent visit in September, reports surfaced of a “known stalker” approaching Prince Harry on two separate occasions, coming dangerously close. The incident underscored the potential vulnerabilities of the revised security protocol.
The Duke offered to personally fund his security, but insisted that private arrangements wouldn’t suffice. He emphasized the critical need for access to the latest intelligence and resources only available to official security services.
Concerns extend beyond Prince Harry himself. In 2022, representatives stated the family – including Meghan, Archie, and Lilibet – felt unable to return to the UK due to perceived safety risks. The prospect of bringing his children to his homeland remains contingent on adequate security assurances.
Now, Ravec has initiated a reassessment of Prince Harry’s threat level, a process expected to conclude next month. This review represents a pivotal moment in the ongoing legal challenge and the future of the Duke’s relationship with his home country.
Government officials maintain that the UK’s protective security system is both rigorous and proportionate, declining to provide specific details to avoid compromising security integrity. The outcome of this case will undoubtedly set a precedent for the security arrangements of other members of the Royal Family and those with inherent security risks.
