RAVEC - Prince Harry

[pilates]

Can someone explain to me the procedure and how this works?

In regards to what? The actual Committee or his court case?

The Committee is a joint set up with Officials from the Home Office, Met Police, am assuming Security Services & Palace Officials who consider Security funding for the Royals and any visiting VIPs (and anyone else who is deemed under enough of a threat to require it - eg. ex-PMs).

Not normal crowd control but elite close Personal Protection (like Richard Madden).

Harry has asked for judicial review of RAVECs decision to not provide this 24/7 for him, but to only provide it on a "case by case" basis depending on their assessment of his current threat level when he visits the UK. He feels they didn't make this decision fairly and were biased towards him (because he says the Palace representatives don't like him). After the case was brought he changed his reasons slightly and said he wanted to pay for security - but RAVEC say you can't pay for CPP - you either need it & are provided with it in the UK or you don't.

(I think, I may have gotten this wrong, I was distracted by Madden).

Thanks MrsF - Oh ok so was it the British government that denied security for H&M not KC?

Yes

This court action will not change the decision. It is examining if the decision was correctly arrived at (the right people, with the right information, acting reasonably to good standards). It's an issue which is inherently concerned with security arrangements, threat assessments and the information/intelligence that goes in to them. That will all be in closed court, for pretty obvious reasons.

If Harry wins, RAVEC will have to amend its procedures to bring them in to line with the findings, and then all decisions will need to be re-visited. That does not mean that any of the decisions will change, rather that they will have been made in accordance with the new standards.

Thank you mpsw for explaining

So do we know when the results will be revealed?

No

There was nothing in the news yesterday, so my guess is that the entire day was closed hearing. I think I read somewhere that the case is expected to last 3 days, but that the ruling will be made later - and I can't remember if it said how much later.

If there's anything in the news today, it might update the likely timings.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12837857/Prince-Harry-says-UK-home-forced-step-royal-duties-leave-country-High-Court-hears-legal-battle-Home-Office-security.html

From the Mail today (Harry's witness statemetn)

I can’t believe Harry is persisting with the nonsense that he was forced to leave . We all remember the grandiose statement announcing their half in/ half out plans.,

@pilates i thought it had been decided??? he lost the case!!! rightly so! and he lies yet again! he was not "forced" to leave at all!!

It’s obviously Harry was actually pitching for his part in Pinocchio at the Disney Premiere

“did I mention I’m great at lying ? “

Forced to leave? He looked pretty happy in the pictures on the plane and the gazillion other staged photos.

I couldn't believe what I read. Forced to leave the country. Utter nonsense. Then he says he wants his children to be at home in the UK. But the UK is not their home. Their home in in the USA. If they visit it will be basically on holiday and each visit will be assessed for their security needs

. Sounds to me like Harry wants to come and go as he pleases and have highest level security each time. He doesn't sound happy with the way things have turned out. His children are basically nonentities as far as royal status and interest is concerned. And he won't be happy with that. But that's only the case because their home is permanently in the US.

He does a great job of making himself look like a complete twat. Does he not realise we were all there, too?

Does he not realise that all this stuff is available to look up? or does he think everyone's just going to take his word for it because of who he is?

In Harry’s head if he says things enough times it becomes true. Madness.

My concern is that if everything goes in his favour, that it will set a precedence for other VIP visitors to request state funded protection. Appreciate that there is a royal element but nonetheless it could be used by a good barrister to argue then we all get thebpleasure of paying their bills to contest a decision 😡

I'm really curious what will happen if hes granted the heavy security he wants but also expected to pay the whole bill. You would assume to have a team to protect a family of 4 when they come to the UK that you would need to have multiple people constantly available at a moments notice employed year round.

We know he wants it for free but given he claimed he offered to pay previously, it will be difficult for him to get out of paying now if he is granted what he wants.

There are so many Princes (and other royals) that come to London for the summer, if they're sons/daughters etc. of the King in their country then shouldn't they be considered IPP and covered by RAVEC. It could turn the whole thing into a circus

Why can’t Harry pay for his own security like he does in USA. He is a multimillionaire ffs.

Miri1985 absolutely ! I would imagine that even though there is a "royal" element to this a good barrister could use this as case law for others such as celebrities

I'm really curious what will happen if hes granted the heavy security he wants but also expected to pay the whole bill

That won't happen. This sort of close protection isn't available to hire. People either qualify and get it (without having to pay) or they don't qualify.

Someone who does qualify, and then chooses to defray some of the costs is able to do so. I've heard (but cannot reliably source) that Tony Blair pays the extra above the UK cost when his team have to travel abroad with him.

Because their US security can't carry guns in the UK and don't have access to UK intelligence about any threats to their employer.

It wouldn’t set a precedent for other VIPs visiting because other VIPs already get protection based on 1) mutual agreements with their country 2) their individual risk assessment. Harry has a unique position as the son of this countries monarch - whatever the ruling it won’t make any difference to the way we protect some Saudi Prince when he comes to do some shopping.

I think people might be misunderstanding this case. It won't be setting any sort of precedent. It's a Judicial Review, so it's challenging the procedure, not the result. The courts cannot change Ravec's decision. Even if the judge rules in Harry's favour, all that can happen is that Ravec have to reassess Harry's case. They might very well come to the same decision all over again.

What is it that Harry is actually asking for? I'm struggling to understand even after reading the article as the Home Office decision to provide as needed on a case by case basis sounds perfectly reasonable.