The Duke of Sussex received full, publicly funded protection until he stepped back from royal duties in 2020
Prince Harry said he is feeling “very let down” after his appeal was refused(Image: Max Mumby/Indigo, Getty Images)
UK taxpayers no longer pay for Prince Harry‘s security, but should they? After the Duke of Sussex and his wife Meghan stepped back from their royal duties in March 2020, the couple lost their right to full, publicly-funded protection.
Now living in America with his wife and children, Archie, 5, and Lilibet, 3, Harry must pay for his own security.
In 2020, the Executive Committee for the Protection of Royalty and Public Figures (Ravec) ruled that the duke will not receive the same level of protection when visiting from the US.
Later that year, Harry began legal action against the Home Office – which is legally responsible for Ravec’s decisions – claiming he no longer “feels safe” when visiting his homeland.
On Friday (May 2), Harry lost an appeal against a ruling for the level of taxpayer-funded security he receives while he is in the UK.
In a lengthy interview with the BBC on Friday in response to losing his appeal, Harry said he “can’t see a world in which I would be bringing my wife and children back to the UK” and that he is “feeling very let down”.
He also said information he learned during the legal process led him to discover “some people want history to repeat itself”, in an apparent reference to the death of his mother Diana, Princess of Wales.
He also told the BBC: “Everybody knew that they were putting us at risk in 2020 and they hoped that me knowing that risk would force us to come back.”
The duke said the protection given to members of the monarchy was a form of “control”, saying: “I think what really worries me more than anything else about today’s decision, depending on what happens next, it set a new precedent that security can be used to control members of the family.
“And effectively what it does is imprison other members of the family from being able to choose a different life.”
A Palace spokesperson said: “All of these issues have been examined repeatedly and meticulously by the courts, with the same conclusion reached on each occasion.”