LONDON — LONDON (AP) — Prince Harry has been given permission to appeal the British government’s rejection to provide him with publicly funded police protection in the U.K.
The Court of Appeal gave the Duke of Sussex the go-ahead to challenge a ruling earlier this year in the High Court. The permission was granted in May but only reported Thursday.
Judge Peter Lane ruled in February that a government panel’s decision to provide “bespoke” security on an as-needed basis after Harry quit as a working member of the royal family was not unlawful, irrational or unjustified.
“Insofar as the case-by-case approach may otherwise have caused difficulties, they have not been shown to be such as to overcome the high hurdle so as to render the decision-making irrational,” Lane wrote.
The long-running fight began more than four years ago when Harry first challenged the panel’s decision, arguing that he and his family need an armed security detail because of hostility directed toward him and his wife Meghan, Duchess of Sussex, on social media and relentless hounding by the news media.
Harry, 39, the younger son of King Charles III, has bucked royal family convention to challenge the government in court and sue the tabloid press.
He won a big victory in December after a judge found phone hacking at Mirror Group Newspapers was “widespread and habitual.” He has two similar cases remaining against the publishers of The Sun and Daily Mail.
The security case appeared to be dead after the High Court in April rejected his first request to appeal Lane’s decision. But Justice David Bean on the Court of Appeal said on May 23 that he could challenge the lower court decision.
Prince Harry has been granted permission to appeal a decision that denied him publicly funded security detail in the UK. The Duke of Sussex had previously requested that the UK government provide him with security protection while he is in the country, but his request was denied by the Home Office.
The decision to deny Prince Harry publicly funded security detail was made in light of his decision to step back from his role as a senior member of the royal family and move to the United States with his wife, Meghan Markle, and their son, Archie. The Home Office argued that since Prince Harry is no longer a working member of the royal family, he is not entitled to publicly funded security.
However, Prince Harry’s legal team has argued that he still faces security threats due to his status as a member of the royal family and should therefore be entitled to publicly funded protection. They have also pointed out that other members of the royal family, such as Princesses Beatrice and Eugenie, receive publicly funded security despite not being working members of the royal family.
The Court of Appeal has now granted Prince Harry permission to appeal the decision, which means that the case will be heard by a panel of judges who will determine whether or not he is entitled to publicly funded security. The appeal is expected to take place later this year.
The case has sparked a debate about the security arrangements for members of the royal family who are no longer working members of the monarchy. Some argue that Prince Harry should be entitled to publicly funded security due to his status as a member of the royal family, while others believe that he should fund his own security now that he is no longer carrying out official duties on behalf of the monarchy.
Regardless of the outcome of the appeal, it is clear that the issue of security for members of the royal family will continue to be a topic of discussion in the UK. Prince Harry’s case highlights the complexities of balancing security needs with public funding and raises important questions about the responsibilities of the royal family in terms of their own protection.
