The Duke of Sussex has called for the Home Secretary to review the body which authorises protection for senior royals after he lost a Court of Appeal challenge over his security arrangements while in the UK.
Harry lost his appeal against the dismissal of his High Court claim against the Home Office over the decision of the Executive Committee for the Protection of Royalty and Public Figures (Ravec) that he should receive a different degree of protection when in the UK.
After the decision on Friday, the 40-year-old told the BBC he would ask Yvette Cooper to âlook at this very, very carefullyâ, and warned that the royal familyâs power over security means it âcan be used to controlâ family members.
When asked whether Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer should âstep inâ, Harry told the BBC: âI think that based on the judgment that the court has put out today, it clearly states that Ravec are not constrained by law. Again, I wish somebody had said that from the beginning.â
He continued: âYes, I would ask the Prime Minister to step in.
âI would ask Yvette Cooper, the Home Secretary, to look at this very, very carefully and I would ask her to review Ravec and its members, because if it is an expert body, then what is the Royal Householdâs role there, if it is not to influence and decide what they want for the members of their household?â
The legal challenge came after Harry and Meghan left the UK and first moved to Canada, and then California, after announcing they wanted to step back as senior royals.
In a summary of the ruling, judge Sir Geoffrey Vos said Ravecâs decision was âunderstandable and perhaps predictableâ.
Sir Geoffrey said Harry had challenged whether the High Court judge, Sir Peter Lane, had been right to conclude that Ravec had good reason not to follow its usual policy of obtaining a risk analysis from the risk management board.
He said he did not think the dukeâs lawyers had been able to demonstrate the judge was wrong.
Sir Geoffrey gave a number of reasons for the finding, including that policies were âinward facing and unpublishedâ.
He also said there had been compelling reasons for the conclusion that the appropriate course was to establish bespoke arrangements for when Harry returned to the UK on future visits.
The Duke of Sussex said: âI think what really worries me more than anything else about todayâs decision, depending on what happens next, it sets a new precedent that security can be used to control members of the family, and effectively, what it does is imprison other members of the family from being able to choose a different life.â
He added: âIf, for me, security is conditional on having an official role, one that both myself and my wife wish to carry on, but then was rejected, not by Ravec, was rejected by the Royal Household, and the result to that is you lose your security.
âThat basically says you canât live outside of their control if you want to be safe.â
The duke said the Court of Appeal decision means it is now âimpossibleâ for him to bring Meghan and their children Prince Archie and Princess Lilibet back to the UK safely.
âI can only come to the UK safely if I am invited, and there is a lot of control and ability in my fatherâs hands,â he said.
âUltimately, this whole thing could be resolved through him, not by intervening, but by stepping aside and allowing the experts to do what is necessary.â
He continued: âThat said, this all was initiated under a previous government. There is now a new Government. I have had it described to me, once people knew about the facts, that this is a good old-fashioned establishment stitch-up, and that is what it feels like.â
A Home Office spokesperson said: âWe are pleased that the court has found in favour of the Governmentâs position in this case.
âThe UK Governmentâs protective security system is rigorous and proportionate.
âIt is our long-standing policy not to provide detailed information on those arrangements, as doing so could compromise their integrity and affect individualsâ security.â
Downing Street was contacted for comment.
