The Duke of Sussex wishes to return to the UK but “does not feel safe,” according to his legal team at the first preliminary hearing against the Home Office over his police protection in the UK.
Prince Harry, 37, has requested a court review of a Home Office decision to deny him the ability to pay for police protection for himself and his family while in the UK.
He wants to bring his children, Archie, two, and Lilibet, eight months old, to visit from the United States, but he and his family are “unable to return to his house” because it is too hazardous, according to a legal counsel for the Duke.
“This claim is about the fact that the Duke does not feel comfortable when he is in the UK given the security procedures applied to him in June 2021 and will continue to be applied if he wishes to come back,” the Duke’s legal adviser, QC Shaheed Fatima, said at Friday’s hearing.
“It goes without saying that he does want to come back to see family and friends and to continue to support the charities that are so close to his heart.
“This is and always will be his home.”
Following their resignation as senior working royals in early 2020, Harry and Meghan lost their taxpayer-funded police protection.
The Duke, who did not appear in person at Friday’s hearing, claims that his private protection team in the United States has proper jurisdiction abroad and access to UK intelligence information required to keep his family safe. The assertion is that the Duke does not feel comfortable in the UK because of the security measures that were put in place for him in June 2021 and will continue to be put in place if he wishes to return.
Last year, he returned from California for the installation of the Diana, Princess of Wales memorial statue on July 1, and the day before, on June 30, he met seriously sick children and young people at a WellChild garden party and afternoon tea in Kew Gardens, west London.
The Duke’s automobile is said to have been pursued by photographers as he drove away.
Previously, a legal representative for Harry stated that the Duke prefers to fund the security himself rather than asking taxpayers to foot the bill. However, the Home Office’s Robert Palmer QC told the court that Harry’s offer of private cash was “irrelevant.”
In written submissions, he said: “Personal protective security by the police is not available on a privately financed basis, and Ravec [Executive Committee for the Protection of Royalty and Public Figures] does not make decisions on the provision of such security on the basis that any financial contribution could be sought or obtained to pay for it.”
He said Ravec had attributed to the Duke “a form of exceptional status” where he is considered for personal protective security by the police “with the precise arrangements being dependent on the reason for his presence in Great Britain and by reference to the functions he carries out when present”.
The barrister added: “A case-by-case approach rationally and appropriately allows Ravec to implement a responsive approach to reflect the applicable circumstances.”
According to the Home Office’s written arguments, Harry’s offer of funding was “notably not advanced to Ravec” during the Duke’s visit in June 2021, or in any pre-action discussions.
Later in the written remarks, Mr Palmer stated that the Duke had “failed to afford the requisite level of respect” to the Home Secretary and Ravec as “the expert, and democratically accountable, decision-maker on questions of protective security and associated risk assessment.”
He added that the Home Office will “seek the costs incurred as a result of this claim in full, including those of the confidentiality exercise, which has resulted in costs being incurred to the public purse”.
