Home Office to review Prince Harry and Meghan’s UK security needs
Prince Harry's access to taxpayer-funded police protection in the UK is being formally reviewed now that he has moved back to Britain with his wife Meghan and their two children. The Home Office committee that decides on security for high-profile figures, known as Ravec, has reportedly written to Harry confirming a "full review" will take place, covering the risks faced by both him and Meghan. This marks a significant development after years of legal disputes in which Harry unsuccessfully challenged the Home Office's decision to strip his automatic right to security following his departure as a working royal in 2020.
The review, known as a Risk Management Board, is said to be the first assessment of potential threats to Meghan since the couple left royal duties, and comes as their children, Archie, seven, and Lilibet, five, have reportedly started at a British school. The news follows a tense period in which sources close to Harry accused Buckingham Palace of trying to undermine the Ravec process via a letter from King Charles describing the Sussexes as "private citizens" rather than working royals, though the Palace maintains the letter was intended only to provide clarity, not to influence the security decision.
- Harry and Meghan's UK security needs face a full official review
- Review follows the family's permanent relocation back to Britain
- First-ever risk assessment to include Meghan since 2020 departure
New here? Start with this
Prince Harry lost his automatic right to police protection in the UK after stepping back from royal duties in 2020, a decision made by the Home Office committee that assesses security for public figures. He challenged this in court but was unsuccessful. Since then, security for Harry and his family during UK visits has been assessed on a case-by-case basis.
The couple, along with their two children, have recently returned to live in Britain, which has prompted a fresh, full review of what protection they need. This is the first time Meghan's security has been formally assessed since the family stepped down from royal duties, reflecting the fact that the threats and circumstances facing them may have changed since they settled abroad.
The issue matters because it touches on questions of cost to the taxpayer, fairness in how security decisions are made for former working royals, and the ongoing strained relationship between Harry and the rest of the royal family, including his father, King Charles.
Both sides, in good faith
The strongest fair case each way — we don't pick a winner.
The case for
Supporters of continued police protection argue that genuine, well-evidenced threats to life do not disappear simply because someone has stepped back from official duties, and that the state has a duty of care to protect anyone, including children, who faces a demonstrable and serious risk. They point out that Harry remains close in line to the throne and a high-profile target regardless of his working status, and that ad hoc or privately funded security may be less robust, less accountable and harder to coordinate with UK police and intelligence services than the established Ravec system. On this view, denying protection on the basis of status rather than risk assessment would be a dangerous precedent that puts politics or resentment ahead of public safety.
The case against
Those who favour a strict, status-based approach argue that taxpayer-funded protection has traditionally been reserved for those actively carrying out official duties on behalf of the country, and that Harry and Meghan's voluntary decision to step back from royal life in 2020 reasonably placed them, by their own choice, outside that category. They contend that extending costly police resources to private citizens, however prominent, risks unfairness to other public figures who face threats without such support, and that if the couple wish for a level of security akin to their former royal role, they have the means to fund it privately. On this view, a consistent and transparent risk-based process, applied equally rather than shaped by personal history or public sympathy, is essential to preserving trust in how public money is spent.
Read the full article at the source →
Originally published by Daily Mail as “Duke and Duchess of Sussex will have security reviewed after their move back to Britain”.