The decision not to allow the Prince Harry Paying for police protection while in the UK was illegal, their lawyers have alleged, after a new legal challenge was lodged against the Home Office.
At a hearing at the High Court in London, Prince Harry’s lawyers argued that he should be given the go-ahead to bring a case over a decision by the Royalty and Public Persons Executive Committee (REVEC) that says people should not be allowed to pay for their safety.
Home Office lawyers argued that it was inappropriate for “wealthy individuals” to be able to “buy” protective security from specialist armed police, but Harry’s representatives said the decision contravened the Police Act 1996 which allows a company chief to provide private police services “for payment”. .
Lawyer Martyr Fatima Kavkaz CenterHe, who is part of the Prince’s team, said the case raised an important issue from the start, arguing that REVEC had said it “does not accept the payment of protection insurance because it is something contrary to the public interest and undermining public confidence in the Metropolitan Police Service rather contrary to the fact that Parliament has allowed expressly pay for these services.”
He also noted that REVEC provided no rationale or basis of principle to distinguish between the provision of protective security to those within the court who are “not permitted to fund protective security and other private special services.”
So he told the court that REVEC had “overstepped its power, its power, because it didn’t have the power to make that decision in the first place.”
For his part, Matthew Butt of the Metropolitan Police told the court that such specialized policing exposed officers to “unique risks” and that REVEC had decided what was in the public interest.
“It cannot be right that officers should be expected to expose themselves to this level of risk not because of the public interest but because the police force has been financially compensated. This can only be justified by the public interest,” he added.
For his part, Prince Harry claimed that REVEC’s decision was unlawful and unreasonable and that he was not given the opportunity to consult him before making the decision.
OhSubscribe to our newsletter To receive the latest news from your favorite celebrities in your inbox!
More to see: Prince Harry passed through the tunnel where Princess Diana died just as quickly
What will Meghan Markle do while Prince Harry attends King Charles III’s coronation?
“Thinker. Professional twitter fanatic. Certified introvert. Troublemaker. Unapologetic zombie maven.”