Judicial victory for Prince Harry for his custody in Great Britain

In the battle between the Duke and Duchess of Sussex and the British Home Office for their custody and safety when they travel to Britain, Prince Harry has won. Judge Jonathan Swift ruled in favor of a “judicial review” of the denial of custody. This means that will be examined by the highest British court.

The Sussexes were unaware that those involved in the RAVEC committee’s decision to deny them protection were Queen Elizabeth’s private secretary, her grandmother, undersecretary and landlord of the Prince of Wales, her father.

They had been told that it was an “independent committee”, without the intervention of the Royal House, which had never told them that the prince wanted to pay for the custodial service.

The Duke of Sussex “has earned the right to judicial review” of the decision not to grant him automatic police protection while in the UK, Judge Swift ruled.

The Duke filed an appeal for five reasonsfour of which according to the judge were “questionable”, although parts of them have been removed.

“The request for authorization to request judicial review is partly accepted and partly rejected”, explained the magistrate.

Lawsuits

Prince Harry has filed a lawsuit against the Ministry of the Interior, claiming that he has been denied a “clear and complete explanation” of the composition of the responsible government committee (Ravec) and others involved in the decision-making process.

He said that Sir Edward Young, the Queen’s private secretary, should not have been involved in the decision to do so deny you police protection in the UK, due to “considerable tensions” between them.

Sir Edward Young was one of those who advised the Queen to deprive her of royal honors, military decorations and any roles inherited from her grandmother, the Duke of Edinburgh, at the famous Sandringham Summit.

He was joined by Prince Charles and Prince William, on their way to high family feud. The retaliation was unexpected and painful for Harry.

Shaheed Fatima QC, the Duke’s attorney, told the High Court he was “unaware of any members of the royal house being involved in the decision.”

He said it was “inappropriate” for them to have a say “, complaining that the duke had been told that the responsible committee of the Ministry of the Interior was” independent “.

The decision

The decision to remove him from custody was made by the Executive Committee for the Protection of Royalty and Public Personalities (known as Ravec) in February 2020. It was shortly after the Duke announced that he would cease to be a working member of the royal family and move abroad with his wife Meghan.

The committee said the duke occupies a “particular and unusual position” and may need protective security under certain circumstances, which will be considered on a case-by-case basis.

The Duke claimed to have inherited the risk at birth and that as such he and his family should have permanent protective security in the UK, regardless of their status as royal non-workers.

Harry is the sixth in line to the throne, a veteran from Afghanistan, where he fought the Taliban as a fighter pilot on an Apache helicopter, and regularly receives threats. There have been nine break-in attempts at his California home. He insists that without such protection in Britain, his wife and her children “will not be safe and will be at personal risk”.

Dr Fátima said government policy made it possible to ensure state security for everyone in the “immediate line of succession”.

He said it had been applied in a “too rigid” way as the duke had been excluded from that scope.

However, This lawsuit was dismissed by the judge.who stated that “it was not unlawful to limit the automatic guarantee to the first six in line of succession”.

The arguments of the judge

The judge also ruled that the role the Duke and Duchess of Sussex had proposed to play in official real life and discussions about it were “irrelevant”.

The judge also dismissed the duke’s claim that the identity of those sitting in Ravec should have been given and not given the opportunity to discuss the “adequacy” of some individuals’ involvement.

“Over the course of the remarks, it became apparent that while the plaintiff may have had disagreements with individuals who were members of the Ravec committee, there was no evidence to support the claim that any member of the committee approached the decisions with a closed mind, “he said.

“As anyone familiar with judicial review requests will know, a conclusion in the clearance phase that a case is questionable is some distance from a conclusion that the case will be successful at the final hearing,” added Judge Swift.

The judicial decision will annoy the royal family because the Queen’s private secretary, her number two and the landlord of the Prince of Wales, next heir to the throne and father of Harry, are involved.

The trial will revive the family tension generated by the Sussexes, in a brawl Real that does not end This Thursday the charity commission “buried” the investigation into the donation to Prince Charles of $ 3 million in cash by a Qatari millionaire and found that there was no crime.

In the United States, the Sussexes have a guard team of 22, all former special forces.

But they cannot come to Britain armed or access the intelligence that the British police have to protect the royals.

Paris, correspondent

CB