Prince Harry has won his quest to sue the Home Office in the High Court over his security arrangements while in the UK. The Duke of Sussex is suing because he was refused permission to pay for police protection for himself and his family while traveling from North America.
Earlier this month, the duke's attorneys requested Court Jonathan Swift to permit a full hearing so that a judge could examine the Home Office's decision.
Judge Allows Prince Harry's UK Police Protection Case To Proceed
The High Court judge indicated the lawsuit may go on in a decision issued on Friday, allowing permission for a judicial review of part of Prince Harry's claim. However, the court denied the duke's request for a reconsideration of several of his allegations, dealing a setback to his cause.
He dismissed arguments advanced by Prince Harry's legal team that he should have known who was on the committee that made the protection decision and that he did not have the chance to remark on the "appropriacy" of the procedure and those engaged in the blocking.
The duke's lawsuit concerns the Executive Committee for the Protection of Royalty and Public Figures' (RAVEC) decision on his security in February 2020, after being notified he would no longer be assigned the same degree of personal protective protection when visiting.
The legal team for Prince Harry is attempting to argue that the security arrangements outlined in a letter from Ravec, their application, as well as his journey to the UK in June 2021, were illegal owing to procedural unfairness since he was not allowed to make informed submissions beforehand, according to Daily Mail.
Prince Harry and former actress Meghan Markle married at Windsor Castle in 2019 but resigned as working royals the following year, claiming the British media's insufferable intrusions and discriminatory views. As per Prince Harry's attorneys, the prince is hesitant to transport the couple's children - Archie, 3, and Lilibet, 1 - to his birthplace because it is unsafe.
The Duke of Sussex wishes to be able to pay for security, claiming that his private security team in the United States lacks proper authority overseas and access to UK intelligence information. His lawyers also claim that a February 2020 decision by the Executive Committee for the Protection of Royalty and Public Figures, which removed his full royal security, was unreasonable because Prince Harry was not allowed to make informed representations beforehand. The British government says the decision was reasonable, and that paying privately for police protection is not possible, as per CBS News.
What's Next With Prince Harry's Security Arrangements?
Swift disagreed with one crucial argument expressed during the preliminary hearing on July 7: Harry should have been informed of who was on the RAVEC committee before their decision was made. The prince's lawyer, Shaheed Fatima, indicated that there were substantial conflicts between Prince Harry and several members of the committee, including the queen's private secretary, Sir Edward Young.
Young is said to have played a crucial part in arranging the Sussexes' withdrawal from working royal life in 2020, representing the queen, Prince Charles, and Prince William. The conclusion was that tensions between Harry and Young may have impacted the RAVEC decision-making.
Swift stated in his finding opinion that "although the Claimant [Harry] may have had disputes with RAVEC committee members, there was no evidence to sustain a claim that any committee member approached judgments with a closed mind, or that any result was influenced by bias."
He added that determining the matter is debatable at the permission stage and is not the same as analyzing the argument that will be prevailed in the final hearing. The RAVEC committee will have the opportunity to defend and provide evidence to back its judgments on the prince's security in the next phases, Newsweek via MSN reported.
Related Article : Prince Charles Won't Be Investigated Over Acceptance of $3 Million "Cash for Honor" from Qatari Sheikh; Here's Why
