...
By Jack Royston and Gabe Whisnant
0
Share
Newsweek is a Trust Project member
See more of our trusted coverage when you search.Prefer Newsweek on Googleto see more of our trusted coverage when you search.
Buckingham Palace responded on Friday following Prince Harry's bombshell BBC News interview in which he accused King Charles III of blocking his bid for police protection.
The Duke of Sussex lost a lawsuit Friday in which he had been pressing for the Metropolitan Police security team to be reinstated during visits to the United Kingdom.
Harry had argued that the British government should have carried out an additional risk assessment by the Risk Management Board [RMB], but the Court of Appeal ruled that it would likely have made little difference.
Read More on World
A Buckingham Palace spokesperson took the rare step of going on the record to respond to Harry's interview to outlets including Newsweek and said: "All of these issues have been examined repeatedly and meticulously by the courts, with the same conclusion reached on each occasion."
Harry sued twice at the High Court in London, and after losing both cases, he lodged an appeal, which he also lost on Friday.
...
In his BBC interview, Harry said he wanted reconciliation with his family. Still, he also suggested his father was standing in the way of getting the RMB risk assessment he believes would lead to his police team's reinstatement.
He also set the emotional stakes sky high when he said Meghan Markle, Prince Archie and Princess Lilibet would not be able to visit Britain without police protection.
He said: "I can't see a world in which I would be bringing my wife and children back to the U.K. at this point, and the things that they're going to miss is, well, everything.
"I love my country I always have done, despite what some people in that country have done. I miss the U.K. I miss parts of the U.K., of course I do. I think it's quite sad that I won't be able to show my children my homeland."
"There is a lot of control and ability in my father's hands," he continued. "Ultimately this whole thing could be resolved through him. Not necessarily by intervening but by stepping aside, allowing the experts to do what is necessary and to carry out an RMB."
The palace has a longstanding position, though, that the decision on who gets police protection is not theirs but rather the police and the Home Office.
That argument was muddied when Prince Harry learned through the lawsuit that palace aides do sit on RAVEC, the Home Office committee that makes decisions, turbocharging his allegations of what he described to the BBC as an establishment stitch-up.
However, the judge's ruling also appeared to vindicate the long-standing position that the palace is not the key decision-maker.
It quoted the committee's terms of reference: "The Royal Household will provide Royal representation and input into the work of [RAVEC], advising the Chair on any specific matters relating to members of the Royal Family.
"This is to help inform the Chair's decision on whether any vulnerability mitigation and/ or protection measures are appropriate at public expense."
While the wording is laden with legalese, the phrase "chair's decision" does appear to support the idea that the actual decision lay in the hands of the chair, Sir Richard Mottram, a government civil servant.
That said, it is unlikely to be enough to persuade Prince Harry.
Jack Royston is chief royal correspondent for Newsweek*, based in London. You can find him on X, formerly Twitter, at @jack_royston and read his stories on Newsweek's The Royals Facebook page.*
Do you have a question about Charles and Queen Camilla, Prince William and Princess Kate, Meghan Markle and Prince Harry, or their family that you would like our experienced royal correspondents to answer? Email royals@newsweek.com. We'd love to hear from you.
Update 5/2/25, 3:15 p.m. ET: This article was updated with additional information.
View 0 Comments
Submit Correction
View Editorial & AI Guidelines