Earlier in May, Prince Harry’s lawyers launched a second round of legal proceedings, arguing that the Duke of Sussex should be allowed to appeal an earlier decision not to allow him to pay for police protection in England.
The Commission for Protection of Royalty and Public Figures (RAVEK) previously ruled that people cannot pay privately to get police protection. The reason is that it would not be right to allow the “rich” to pay for special police protection. The prince’s lawyers, on the other hand, considered the decision illegal.
So lawyers have pressed for a legal review of the decision – an application that has now been rejected.
“not irrational”
Ravec argues that allowing a wealthy individual to pay for security services can undermine the public’s trust in the police to provide security services that they would not have if they were less wealthy. Allowing private financing of that type of security service would also reduce the availability of a limited specialized resource.
British Supreme Court Judge writes in judgment “These services are inherently different from policing services provided at sporting or recreational events because they involve the employment of highly trained specialized officers, a small number of whom are required to put themselves at risk for their safety. Principals. There are political reasons why these services are not available for payment, although there are others. Also, Ravek had his point. I can’t see anything irrational in that line of reasoning.
read more: Harry and Meghan on “catastrophic” car chase with paparazzi
read more: The newspaper admits: information about Harry was collected
read more: Harry will attend the coronation – but Meghan won’t
Want to learn more about how GP works with quality journalism? Read our Code of Conduct Here.
More Stories
UK expands military contract with Saab
Saab receives more orders for training systems from the UK
Saab receives more orders for training systems from the UK