By
Ryan Ledendecker
|
May 24, 2023
|
11:45 pm

Prince Harry denied ability to pay UK government for extra security detail

Prince Harry lost his extra security protection when he left the royal family, and he just received bad legal news in his attempt to gain it back. 

According to Breitbart, Prince Harry took legal action to be able to pay the UK government a fee for extra police protection on the occasions when he visits his home country.

This week, that legal fight was squashed, and the prince was denied the opportunity to pay out of pocket for extra security protection.

Breitbart noted:

Such a demand however was rejected by the Executive Committee for the Protection of Royalty and Public Figures (Ravec), which claimed that allowing the British royal to do so would set the precedent that wealthy people could simply “buy” protection from UK police not available to the masses.

Ravec wasn't convinced that Prince Harry should be afforded such an opportunity, adding that his legal team's argument in favor of it was "unfounded."

The judge argued that the laws cited by Prince Harry's legal team applied to extra police protection available for public events, and not for individuals.

“[Ravec’s] reasoning was narrowly confined to the protective security services that fall within its remit," Chamberlain said in the ruling, Justice Chamberlain, a British judge, said.

"Those services are different in kind from the police services provided at (for example) sporting or entertainment events, because they involve the deployment of highly trained specialist officers, of whom there are a limited number, and who are required to put themselves in harm’s way to protect their principals," the judge continued.

"Ravec’s reasoning was that there are policy reasons why those services should not be made available for payment, even though others are," Chamberlain added. "I can detect nothing that is arguably irrational in that reasoning."

The judge also said that if the prince were to be afforded such services, it would set a bad precedent in that wealthy people would be able to buy protection that regular class people couldn't.

Social media users reacted to the news.

"That would be like any US celebrity expecting they could hire out the FBI. What a disastrous legal prescient that would have set for the UK. The MET isn’t for hire by rich people at the expense of protection for everyon," one Twitter user wrote.

Written By:
Ryan Ledendecker

Latest Posts

See All
Don't Wait.
We publish the objective news, period. If you want the facts, then sign up below and join our movement for objective news:
Newsletter
Get news from American Digest in your inbox.
By submitting this form, you are consenting to receive marketing emails from: American Digest, 3000 S. Hulen Street, Ste 124 #1064, Fort Worth, TX, 76109, US, https://americandigest.com. You can revoke your consent to receive emails at any time by using the SafeUnsubscribe® link, found at the bottom of every email. Emails are serviced by Constant Contact.
© 2023 - The American Digest - All Rights Reserved
hello world!
Privacy Policy