Prince Harry “lost” in court today, in his years-long attempt to get some accountability for how his royal security was removed in 2020. In the four years since the Sussexes’ royal protection was withdrawn, we have gotten a fuller picture on how and why it happened. Basically, the fix was in as soon as Harry refused to stop pursuing all of the leaks from Kensington Palace, plus Harry started suing all of the British newspapers. There was a lot of drama with QEII’s private secretary Edward Young, who was also on the RAVEC committee which oversees who gets royal protection. Young and Charles’s office made sure that the Sussexes’ security was yanked suddenly in 2020, and Harry has spent years trying to get everything on the record about how and why that happened. Plus, Harry wants royal security when he visits the UK, which Ravec and the Met Police have rejected (even though Harry wants to pay back the costs). In any case, Harry lost:

Prince Harry has lost a High Court challenge against the government over the level of his security protection when he is in the UK. The Duke of Sussex had been trying to overturn a ruling which saw his security status downgraded after he stopped being a “working royal”. His lawyers argued there was unfairness in how the decision was made. The Home Office previously said his security was decided on a case-by-case basis.

Back in December, when the challenge was made, Home Office lawyers told the High Court Prince Harry would still have publicly-funded police security, but these would be “bespoke arrangements, specifically tailored to him”, rather than the automatic security provided for full-time working royals. Much of the legal proceedings, which covered security arrangements for senior figures, were held in private in December, with the ruling issued by retired High Court judge Sir Peter Lane on Wednesday morning.

The ruling could have implications for the Duke’s future visits to the UK, as he previously argued that the lower level of security has made it difficult to bring his family to the country.

In the ruling, Sir Peter rejected the Duke’s case, finding that there had not been any unlawfulness in reaching the decision to downgrade Prince Harry’s security status, and that any departure from policy was justified. It found the decision was not irrational, nor marred by procedural unfairness. In the 51-page, partially redacted document, Sir Peter said Harry’s lawyers had taken “an inappropriate, formalist interpretation of the Ravec process”.

Ravec, or the Royal and VIP Executive Committee, arranges security for members of the Royal Family and other VIPs. It has delegated responsibility from the Home Office, and has involvement from the Metropolitan Police, the Cabinet Office and the royal household. The ruling also found that the “‘bespoke’ process devised” for Prince Harry by Ravec “was, and is, legally sound”.

[From BBC]

I have no idea if Prince Harry actually thought he was ever going to win any of these legal challenges, but I’ve always believed that he did all of this to simply put some things on the record and to show everyone that the whole process was pretty hinky. Plus, I think Harry was going on his own little fact-finding mission, because he initially did not understand how and why he got screwed over so badly. I always go back to Harry’s mother and how she didn’t have royal protection in the last year of her life, and how the Firm always claimed that Diana herself rejected royal protection. Harry was like: they’re not doing that to me, I’m putting it on the record that they removed my security by a shady, unfair process and that the order came from Buckingham Palace and Clarence House.

Update: This is Harry’s response, via a legal spokesperson: “The Duke is not asking for preferential treatment, but for a fair and lawful application of RAVEC’s own rules..The Duke’s case is that the so-called “bespoke process” that applies to him, is no substitute for that risk analysis. The Duke of Sussex hopes he will obtain justice from the Court of Appeal, and makes no further comment while the case is ongoing.”

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Cover Images.