The Duke of Sussex has won his fight for armed police protection when he visits the UK, it has been claimed.
The royal and VIP executive committee (Ravec) is said to have determined that Prince Harry meets the threshold for official protection and a ruling in his favour is expected in a matter of weeks.
Harry, 41, in May lost a high-profile legal claim against the government over the decision to remove his right to automatic taxpayer-funded police protection.
The King travels past armed Metropolitan Police officers before watching a military procession for VE Day
MAX MUMBY/GETTY IMAGES
Ravec, which is overseen by the Home Office, launched a fresh risk assessment after the duke wrote to Shabana Mahmood, the home secretary, in September, calling for a reappraisal.
According to the Mail on Sunday, sources close to the Sussexes say that a reinstatement of armed security has been assured. “It’s now a formality. Sources at the Home Office have indicated that security is now nailed on for Harry,” the sources said.
The duke has consistently argued that it is not safe for his family to visit the UK without 24-hour armed protection, which was withdrawn in 2020 after his decision to step back from his role as a working royal.
At present he must inform the Metropolitan Police 30 days before arriving in the country in order to apply for a security review, which is carried out on a case-by-case basis. His lawyers have argued that his “manifestly inferior” security has put his life “at stake”.
Harry and Meghan in California in 2024
KEVIN MAZUR/GETTY IMAGES
Harry’s recent demand for armed protection seemingly follows an incident with a stalker, who had previously made online threats. The duke was granted police protection for one day on a trip to the UK in September for a children’s charity event at the Royal Lancaster hotel, during which the woman was able to enter a “secure zone”.
Two days later, when Harry was without police protection during a visit to Imperial College London, she got within a “stone’s throw” of him and attempted to approach him. She was allegedly only prevented from doing so by a member of Harry’s private security team.
It was one of several security lapses that were included as evidence to be flagged to the risk management board that advises Ravec.
Its members are said to have decided that the duke does meet the threshold for automatic protection, leaving Ravec with little choice but to grant his request. A source said that the “only thing that could scupper his approval now would be an intervention from the Palace”.
The Grenadier Guards and Met officers line The Mall before a carriage procession transporting the King
MAX MUMBY/GETTY IMAGES
Ravec includes security officials from the Home Office, the Met and the royal household, who advise the independent chairman on who should be given protection and the appropriate level.
The Home Office has legal responsibility for the committee’s decision and successfully opposed the duke’s appeal in May.
Speaking after his defeat, Harry told the BBC that the case surrounding his security was like “a good old-fashioned establishment stitch-up”. He called on Yvette Cooper, who was home secretary at the time, to review the case “very, very carefully” and added: “I would ask the prime minister to step in.”
Harry has asked for Ravec to “abide by its own rules” — that a review should be conducted for each member of the royal family and other qualifying VIPs each year.
A ruling in the duke’s favour could pave the way for a reunion between the King and his grandchildren Archie, six, and Lilibet, four. A source told the Mail on Sunday: “If you knew about the kind of threats Harry and his children have been getting then you would understand why he doesn’t want to bring the kids over until police protection is granted.”
• Prince Harry: I’m exhausted by court fight over security
The King last saw his Californian-based grandchildren when they visited the UK as part of the late Queen’s Platinum Jubilee celebrations in February 2022. At the time Archie was two and Lilibet was eight months old.
A spokesman for the Sussexes declined to comment on “security matters”.
A government official said: “The UK government’s protective security system is rigorous and proportionate. It is our long-standing policy not to provide detailed information on those arrangements, as doing so could compromise their integrity and affect individuals’ security.”