PRINCE Harry has been defended over his legal bid for police protection while in the UK after a former officer told him to “keep quiet for a little while”. The Duke of Sussex has said he is unable to bring his family back to the UK because it is too dangerous without police protection and has filed a claim for a judicial review against the Home Office decision not to allow him to personally pay for the security.
Speaking on talkRADIO, former police officer and head of royal protection Dai Davies said Harry “can’t just pick and choose” and advised him to “keep quiet for a little while, that will lower your profile a great deal”. Mr Dai’s comments prompted a number of other Twitter users to rush to Harry’s defence. One user with the handle @TessEractica commented: “There was never any good reason to parade a grieving child behind his mother’s corpse. This brutal disregard for that boy’s feelings enriched a lot of media outlets that day. “That boy’s trauma was made into a spectacle. He is owed protection now.”
Another, @TashaCNS, said: “‘Lower his profile a bit’?! He doesn’t need to do that! UK needs to protect him & his family.” One more, @JoAnnMo43672902, added: “What’s the big deal. If Harry wants to pay for it. I’m with Harry and Meghan.”
Meghan could ‘never’ return to UK as Harry police row ‘very good excuse’
MEGHAN Markle may never return to the UK as Prince Harry’s police protection row gives her a “very good excuse”, a royal expert has claimed. The Duke of Sussex has said claimed in legal proceedings he is unable to bring his family back to Britain because it is too dangerous without police protection. He has launched a legal bid against the Government to allow him to pay for the security for himself, Meghan, Archie and Lili while in the UK.
But royal expert Phil Dampier said he does not believe Harry expects to win the case. He told The Sun: “I don’t think Meghan will ever come back to this country and I think this is a very good excuse for not coming back – I don’t think realistically [Harry] expects to win this case.” The Sussexes lost their taxpayer-funded police protection in the UK after quitting as working royals. Mr Dampier warned that, in his opinion, allowing Harry to pay for police protection in Britain would “set a precedent” for other celebrities to make the same demand.
He said the Duke may travel to Britain this year for the Queen’s Platinum Jubilee celebrations but Meghan, Archie and Lili are unlikely to join him. The royal author said: “Getting his protection reinstated would set a precedent and so it gives them the perfect opportunity to say [if they lost the case] we can’t come to Platinum Jubilee celebrations. “Harry might come over but it gives Meghan a good excuse not to come and also not to bring the children.”
It emerged over the weekend that Harry filed a claim in September for a judicial review against the Home Office decision not to allow him to personally pay for police protection for himself and his family while in the UK. The Sussexes fund a private security team for themselves in the US. But Harry is arguing that the US team does not have adequate jurisdiction abroad or access to UK intelligence information which is needed to keep the Sussex family safe in Britain.
A legal representative for the Duke said: “Prince Harry inherited a security risk at birth, for life. He remains sixth in line to the throne, served two tours of combat duty in Afghanistan, and in recent years his family has been subjected to well-documented neo-Nazi and extremist threats. “While his role within the institution has changed, his profile as a member of the Royal Family has not. Nor has the threat to him and his family.
“The Duke and Duchess of Sussex personally fund a private security team for their family, yet that security cannot replicate the necessary police protection needed whilst in the UK. In the absence of such protection, Prince Harry and his family are unable to return to his home. “The Duke first offered to pay personally for UK police protection for himself and his family in January of 2020 at Sandringham. That offer was dismissed. He remains willing to cover the cost of security, as not to impose on the British taxpayer.
“As is widely known, others who have left public office and have an inherent threat risk receive police protection at no cost to them. The goal for Prince Harry has been simple – to ensure the safety of himself and his family while in the UK so his children can know his home country.” The legal representative said Harry’s security was compromised during a trip to the UK last July “due to the absence of police protection”.
It is understood his car was chased by photographers as he left a charity event.The legal representative added: “After another attempt at negotiations was also rejected, he sought a judicial review in September 2021 to challenge the decision-making behind the security procedures, in the hopes that this could be re-evaluated for the obvious and necessary protection required. “The UK will always be Prince Harry’s home and a country he wants his wife and children to be safe in. With the lack of police protection, comes too great a personal risk.
“Prince Harry hopes that his petition – after close to two years of pleas for security in the UK – will resolve this situation. It is due to a leak in a UK tabloid, with surreptitious timing, we feel it necessary to release a statement setting the facts straight.” A Government spokesperson 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. To do so could compromise their integrity and affect individuals’ security. “It would also not be appropriate to comment on the detail of any legal proceedings.”