The judicial case of Prince Harry for security in the United Kingdom, he explained

Tuesday, the Court of Appeal of England will begin two days of auditions on the legal case of Prince Harry for the retirement of security publicly financed for his family during their visits to the United Kingdom

After Harry and his wife, Meghan Markle, announced that they were You choose From their real roles and leaving Great Britain in 2020, an official committee decided that the couple would no longer be entitled to police protection normally given to the members of the royal family.

Harry is challenging this decision. Him I lost a previous phase of the case of February last year, but a judge subsequently granted it appeal permit the sentence for limited reasons. The judge claimed to have been persuaded, although “not without hesitation”, that an appeal had a “real successful perspective”.

Three judges of the London Court of Appeal will listen to the topics of Harry’s lawyers that the decision to withdraw the protection has violated the official policy. Part of the case will be conducted in private due to the sensitive nature of the evidence around the safety processes and the risk assessments, the Court said.

What’s talking about?

The case concerns a decision of February 28, 2020 that Harry and Meghan will no longer qualify for the protection of security publicly financed in the United Kingdom, after retiring from their official roles and have started a new life in Canada. In March 2020, they moved from Vancouver to California.

The decision was made by an organ called the Executive Committee for the protection of real and public figures, known as Ravec, who brings together government officials, police and members of the royal family. Ravec is responsible for making security agreements for the royal family and other characters based in the United Kingdom who are at particular risk of terrorism, obsessive behavior or other threats.

During the first phase of Harry’s case, listened to at the Upper Court of London in 2022, his lawyers said they did not know that the committee existed and had no opportunity to evaluate his decision. After saying that discussions were taking place on his security arrangement, he wrote a letter to an official of the government that expressed disbelief and concern. The letter, dated 10 February 2020, mentioned her mother, Princess Diana, who was killed in a 1997 car accident while she was pursued by Paparazzi in Paris.

Harry claimed that his family was even greater because of “further layers of racism and extremism” and that the safety of the London metropolitan police was essential. He wrote that he believed that the lack of consultation could be “some form of punishment to protect my family and have them in the first place” – an accusation that the British government denied.

What has happened in the case so far?

Harry launched his legal challenge in September 2021, claiming that Ravec had violated his policy by withdrawing the publicly financed protection, that the committee had not taken into consideration the key factors and that he had not followed a fair process and was insufficiently transparent.

In the first phase of the case, in July 2022, the Court felt the testimony that Harry offered “Reimburizing or financing proactively the cost of security measures “, but Ravec decided that it would be wrong” in principle “. The Ministry of the Interior reported to the Court that the Committee decided that it was not appropriate for rich people” buy “protective security as the government’s armed police, when she had already decided that the protection was not justified on a publicly financed basis.

It was said that Ravec was worried about the fact that allowing private funding “would reduce the availability” of a limited pool of close protection agents in Great Britain, where the police are not usually armed and subjected to an intensive specialist training for the role.

Harry has lost a specific legal challenge for the financing decision in 2023 and a judge of the High Court he rejected his case For wider reasons in February 2024.

He was granted permission to appeal three months later, but only on legal points concerning if Ravec had violated his policy.

While the case continues, Harry has visited the United Kingdom on several occasions, also for the funeral of his grandmother Regina Elizabeth II, and for the coronation of his father King Charles III, and paid for private security.

The high court felt the testimony that Harry’s representatives had applied to Ravec for public security protections for each visit.

When will we know the verdict?

After the conclusion of the two days of Wednesday, the judges of the Court of Appeal can announce their sentence on the same day or “reserve judgment”, which means that they deliberately deliberate for weeks or months before announcing their decision.

Any side loses the case can request authorization to assemble an appeal to the UK’s Supreme Court. The authorization is not automatically granted, because the judges must decide if there is a perspective that would be successful.

The British house house declared that it cannot directly comment on the judicial case, but has declared in a declaration: “The protective security system of the government of the United Kingdom is rigorous and proportionate. It is our long -standing policy not to provide detailed information on these agreements, since this could compromise their integrity and influence people’s security”.