🎙️ Voice is AI-generated. Inconsistencies may occur.
Prince Harry believed that he and his family faced "greater risk" in Britain than Princess Diana during her lifetime, court filings have revealed.
On Wednesday, a judge in London ruled that the U.K. government's decision to remove the prince's full-time state funded police protection in 2020 was made legally.
Documents cited in the judge's ruling showed that in February 2020, Harry wrote to the cabinet secretary, Sir Mark Sedwill, a senior government official, demanding to know the name of the person responsible for removing his police protection. In doing so he drew reference to his late mother, Princess Diana, who died after her car crashed in Paris while being dangerously pursued by photographers in 1997.
"The claimant asked who would be willing to put him and his family in a position of extreme vulnerability and risk," the judgement reads.
"A position that no one was willing to put my mother in 23 years ago," Harry said in his letter, adding that the threat level for him now is different. "And yet today, with greater risk, as mentioned above, with the additional layers of racism and extremism, someone is comfortable taking accountability for what could happen. I would like that person's name who is willing to take accountability for this choice please."
Harry has been in a four-year legal battle with the Home Office, over its subsidiary group RAVEC's (the Royal and VIP Executive Committee) decision to strip him of his police bodyguards when he stepped down as a working royal with Meghan Markle.
Harry argued through his lawyers that RAVEC acted illegally in not following due process. He said he wasn't told a senior member of Queen Elizabeth II's household with whom he had a strained relationship sat on the committee, that an offer he made to pay for police protection himself wasn't communicated to the committee, and that he wasn't given the opportunity to make his own case to them before the decision was taken.
In 2023, the court ruled that police protection can't be paid for by individuals and on February 28, Judge Sir Peter Lane ruled that the committee acted legally in its decision-making process, leaving the action to remove his full-time police protection in effect.
Harry and his family still receive police protection when visiting the U.K., but it is assessed on a case-by-case basis, taking into account whether they are traveling in a private capacity, or at the invitation of the monarch for a specific event.
On Thursday, a spokesperson for Harry set clear the prince's intention to appeal the judge's ruling.
"The Duke of Sussex will appeal today's judgment which refuses his judicial review claim against the decision-making body RAVEC, which includes the Home Office, the Royal Household and the Met Police," they said.
"The Duke is not asking for preferential treatment but for a fair and lawful application of RAVEC's own rules, ensuring that he receives the same consideration as others in accordance with RAVEC's own written policy.
"In February 2020, RAVEC failed to apply its written policy to the Duke of Sussex and excluded him from a particular risk analysis. 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."
Newsweek approached representatives of Prince Harry via email for comment.
James Crawford-Smith is Newsweek's royal reporter, based in London. You can find him on X (formerly Twitter) at @jrcrawfordsmith 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.
About the writer
James Crawford-Smith is a Newsweek Royal Reporter, based in London, U.K. His focus is reporting on the British royal family ... Read more