A source claims that another hurdle has emerged in Prince Harry’s fight for UK security. The news comes amid the Duke of Sussex’s ongoing effort to secure taxpayer-funded protection while in the UK. The Home Office downgraded the Sussexes’ automatic police protection after he and Meghan Markle stepped back from senior royal duties in 2020.
Prince Harry’s UK security demand review reportedly delayed due to this major reason
Prince Harry’s wait continues as a review of his UK police protection has reportedly been put on hold. The Duke came to Britain for a week earlier this month and filed for a review of his security status. However, it was turned down only hours before he was due to travel with his family in early July.
Hence, Prince Harry made the trip on his own first, before Meghan Markle and their two children arrived later in the week. Per the Daily Express, the Home Office told the 41-year-old at the end of last year that a risk management board would re-evaluate his right to UK protection.
Ravec, the Home Office-overseen Royal and VIP Executive Committee, had March pencilled in for the review. But by the end of June, it still hadn’t taken place. The Times reported that officials received orders to put Harry’s review on hold temporarily due to high demand. They are currently focused on protecting a record nine former prime ministers at the same time.
Since stepping down as a working royal, Prince Harry must give at least one month’s notice before visiting the UK. But on each visit since then, his request for police protection has been turned down. The prince also lost his years-long court case against the Home Office in the Court of Appeal last May.
King Charles has not intervened in the matter of his younger son’s reduced security. He is leaving all decisions on the issue to government committees, in line with constitutional convention, even as he navigates ongoing family tensions. Palace sources have consistently said that security decisions are not a royal prerogative. That stance has not changed, despite the high-profile nature of the case.
Originally reported by Sibanee Gogoi on Mandatory.
