Prince Harry is taking legal action against the Government over its
decision to remove his UK police security.
Lawyers acting for
Harry, who stepped down from Royal duties two years ago, have written a
‘pre-action protocol’ letter to the Home Office, indicating that they will seek
a judicial review if the Sussexes are not provided with continued security
while they are in Britain – which they make clear he is happy to pay for.
If the case proceeds,
it will lead to a battle in the High Court between Ministers and Prince Harry.
Harry’s argument is
that his private protection team in the US does not have access to UK
intelligence information, which is needed to keep his wife and children safe.
 |
| The Duke and Duchess of Sussex have made no secret of their unhappiness at the removal of their security being guarded by publicly funded British UK and Canadian security |
The Queen is understood
to have been made aware of her grandson’s action, which is thought to be the
first time a member of the Royal Family has brought a case against Her
Majesty’s Government.
A source said: ‘Harry’s
argument, in a nutshell, is: “You got the law wrong.” He feels the decision to
remove his security was wrong. The pre-action protocol was sent by Harry’s lawyers
to the Home Office a couple of months ago. This is essentially a precursor to a
judicial review.’
The Prince’s lawyers
issued an extraordinary statement defending his decision to sue the British
Government – and insisting he would not rely on taxpayers to fund his family’s
security.
The legal action was
sparked after Harry’s most recent trip to the UK in July when his police
protection had been removed.
A source said: ‘When
Harry came back last April for Prince Philip’s funeral, he was given security.
But when he came back in the summer, he wasn’t.’
Ahead of the funeral,
Harry travelled to Britain with his private security team but was met on the
tarmac at Heathrow by Scotland Yard protection officers.
It is understood that
was not the case when he returned to the UK for the unveiling of a statue of
Princess Diana at Kensington Palace with his brother William in July.
Following a 20-minute
reception after the unveiling, Harry left with bodyguards thought to have been
provided at his own expense.
The Duke and Duchess of
Sussex have made no secret of their unhappiness at the removal of their
taxpayer-funded security. The couple were living in Canada – guarded by
publicly funded British UK and Canadian security – when ‘Megxit’ was announced
in January 2020.
 |
| When Harry came back last April for Prince Philip’s funeral [above], he was given security. |
At the same time, the
security section of their new website – on which they detailed their notion of
a ‘new working model’ – described them as ‘internationally protected people’.
Following crisis talks
at Sandringham, it was eventually agreed that the Sussexes would no longer use
their ‘HRH’ titles and Harry was stripped of his military honours.
Meanwhile, a ‘Royal and
VIP Executive Committee’ comprising the Home Secretary, the Metropolitan
Police’s royalty protection command chief and palace officials decided that the
couple’s 24-hour protection could not continue given they were no longer
working Royals living in Britain.
That decision clearly
rankled with Harry, who used the bombshell TV interview with US chat-show host
Oprah Winfrey last March to express his anger.
He said: ‘The
biggest concern was that while we were in Canada, in someone else’s house, I
then got told at short notice security was going to be removed… Their
justification is a change in status, of which I pushed back and said, “Well, is
there a change of threat or risk?”
‘And after many weeks
of waiting, eventually, I got the confirmation that no, the risk and threat
hasn’t changed but [it was] due to our change in status, [by] which we would no
longer be official working members of the Royal Family.’
 |
| Before moving into their nine-bedroom, £10 million home in Montecito, California, the Sussexes were given the use of a mansion (above) owned by entertainment tycoon Tyler Perry, who also provided the couple with security |
He added: ‘My family
literally cut me off financially and I had to afford security for us.’
Ms Winfrey said the
couple were not paid for the interview, but Harry had, by then, received a
reported £500,000 fee to give a keynote speech to J P Morgan bankers in Miami.
Before moving into their nine-bedroom, £10 million home in Montecito,
California, they were given the use of a mansion owned by entertainment tycoon
Tyler Perry, who also provided the couple with security.
Meghan told Ms Winfrey: ‘We needed a house and he offered security as
well, so it gave us breathing room to try to figure out what we were going to
do.’
Harry’s decision to
instruct his lawyers to take legal action against the Government could inflame
tensions with his family.
It also provides a
further headache for the Queen only days after she stripped Prince Andrew of
his military honours and charity patronages after a US judge ruled that a claim
of sex abuse made against him – and vehemently denied – would proceed.
