Prince Harry's Anger at Coronation

Prince Harry's lawyers have criticized the decision on his policing arrangements for King Charles III's coronation—but Britain's Home Office has stood its ground, a court filing seen by Newsweek shows.

The Duke of Sussex flew to Britain for his father's big moment but left so quickly that he was already on a plane before the day's events had finished.

Now, British Government lawyers have said the prince complained about the decision over what police protection he should offered, which was taken by Home Office committee RAVEC [Royal and VIP Executive Committee].

It is not definitively known what police protection Harry was given, as the court filing is redacted, but Newsweek was told at the time of the Platinum Jubilee that the prince had been given a police team only for those events he was officially invited to and at no other time.

As a result, Harry and Meghan Markle attended two Jubilee events and otherwise remained at Frogmore Cottage in Windsor, England, with their children, Prince Archie and Princess Lilibet.

The new revelations were contained in filings, seen by Newsweek, from a December 5 hearing at the High Court, in London, in Harry's lawsuit against the U.K. government over the decision to strip him of his police protection.

The prince's lawyers said, "the May 2023 decision was irrational," while the Home Office's filing read: "[Prince Harry] separately alleges that RAVEC's decision of May [Redacted Text] when attending the Coronation on 5-6 May 2023 was irrational. It was not.

"The expert judgment of RAVEC was that [Redacted Text]. Despite the fact that these matters have been explained to [Prince Harry] in correspondence and now in evidence, [Prince Harry] still fails to engage with the explanation given. RAVEC's approach is unchallengeable," the filing added.

Harry's lawyers also said decisions taken in March and June, when he was in Britain to attend court for two tabloid lawsuits, were "irrational" and added that "this was insufficient for the reasons" given in a court filing.

The March case was in relation to historic phone-hacking allegations against the Daily Mail. In June, Harry became the first royal family member in more than a century to testify in a court case because of his lawsuit against Mirror Group Newspapers.

The Home Office court filing reads: "Finally, [Prince Harry] alleges that RAVEC's decisions in March and July 2023 to [Redacted Text] for his attendance at court for legal proceedings was irrational. It was not."

Harry's team wants to force the Home Office to take the decision over his police protection again, but even if he wins, there is no guarantee that the government will reinstate the armed officers.

It is possible the Home Office would simply arrive at the same conclusion again through a different process.

Jack Royston is chief royal correspondent for Newsweek, based in London. You can find him on X, formerly Twitter, at @jack_royston and read his stories on Newsweek's The Royals Facebook page.

Do you have a question about King Charles III, William and Kate, Meghan and Harry, or their family that you would like our experienced royal correspondents to answer? Email royals@newsweek.com. We'd love to hear from you.