Prince Harry, Duke of Sussex and younger son of British monarch King Charles III, has lost a legal challenge in a High Court hearing over his proposal to be allowed to privately pay for police protection in the UK.
According to the BBC, Harry's lawyers wanted a judicial review of the rejection of his offer after his security arrangements changed upon stepping down as a "working royal" in 2020.
Lawyers from the Home Office told the court of their opposition to the idea of allowing wealthy people to "buy" security from local police.
Paparazzi chase
The case was made after Harry and his wife, Meghan Markle, were involved in what their representative called a "near catastrophic car chase" involving paparazzi when the couple was in New York.
The Duke and Duchess of Sussex had finished attending the Ms. Foundation Woman of Vision Awards alongside the prince's mother-in-law, Doria Ragland when photographers allegedly pursued them for "over two hours".
Harry's mother, Princess Diana, died in a car crash in 1997 after she was similarly involved in a car chase involving Paris paparazzi.
Home Office: No special treatment for King's estranged son
Prince Harry's legal team challenged the decision made by the Royal and VIP Executive Committee (RAVEC) to remove the Duke of Sussex's protection detail when he stepped down as a "working royal," citing the committee "exceeded its authority" as the body does not have an executive capacity to decide on the matter.
They additionally argued the prince could use the legislative provision allowing for the payment of "special police services," which was "not inconsistent with the public interest or public confidence in the Metropolitan Police Service"
However, Home Office lawyers indicated the type of protection, which could mean "specialist officers as bodyguards," was not the same as funding for extra policing for football matches.
The Home Office also said RAVEC unanimously rejected the offer of private payment as a matter of policy to prevent wealthy persons "to 'buy' protective security."
Additionally, lawyers for the Metropolitan Police found Prince Harry's proposal to expose officers to danger because of "payment of a fee by a private individual" unreasonable.
