Home Office reviews Prince Harry UK security rules

Here’s the headline fact you came for: the UK government’s protection system is reassessing Prince Harry’s security when he visits Britain. On 8 December 2025, The Times and Sky News reported that the Home Office has asked its RAVEC committee to run a fresh threat assessment, the first since 2020, with a decision expected in January 2026. The Guardian says the Risk Management Board will feed in expert analysis.

Why is this happening now? Because the legal route has closed for now but the safety questions haven’t. In May 2025, the Court of Appeal rejected the duke’s claim that he had been treated unfairly when his automatic police protection ended after stepping back from royal duties. Judges said the decision-making was lawful. That left the on‑the‑ground risk picture, rather than the law, as the live issue.

You might remember the interview that followed. Speaking to the BBC, Harry said he was devastated by the ruling and described returning with his family as impossible under current arrangements: “I can’t see a world in which I would be bringing my wife and children back to the UK at this point.” UK outlets including the Evening Standard reported those comments at the time.

Who actually decides on VIP protection? Not the King, and not ministers. In the UK, protective security for royalty and some public figures is determined by the Executive Committee for the Protection of Royalty and Public Figures-known as RAVEC-housed in the Home Office with representation from the Metropolitan Police and the royal household. Reporting on 8 December made clear this review is being carried out without ministers’ input.

How do they make the call? RAVEC commissions specialist assessments of three things: the credibility of threats, the individual’s vulnerability, and the wider impact on the state if an attack succeeded. The Guardian reported that, for this review, RAVEC has asked its Risk Management Board to reassess the duke’s threat level. Meanwhile, The Times notes he currently has to request protection at least 30 days before any visit so that each trip can be assessed.

Automatic protection versus case‑by‑case is the key distinction. Senior working royals usually receive ongoing armed police protection funded by the taxpayer. In early 2020, RAVEC decided Harry would move to an individually tailored approach because he no longer undertook official duties and lived abroad. Courts later found that arrangement lawful, even if it felt unsatisfactory to him.

Why can’t private security simply fill the gap? In Britain, armed close protection is delivered by specialist police units. The Met’s Royalty and Specialist Protection (RaSP) provides armed personal security for the royal family and other protectees; most police officers are not armed, and private bodyguards cannot carry guns in the UK. That’s one reason police‑run protection is different in kind from private cover.

Could he pay for police protection himself? He tried. In 2023, a High Court judge refused his bid to challenge the rule that specialist police protection cannot be bought privately. The court accepted arguments that allowing wealthy individuals to pay would reduce a scarce resource and blur public trust in impartial policing. That route is closed unless policy changes.

What this review could change. If the new assessment finds materially higher risk or impact than in 2020, RAVEC could adjust the level of police protection on UK visits. That might make family visits more feasible; publicly reported accounts suggest the King last saw Archie and Lilibet during the Platinum Jubilee in 2022. Even if protection is upgraded, you won’t see operational details published for safety reasons.

How to read updates from here. Expect sparse official comment: the government repeats that the system is rigorous and proportionate and won’t share specifics. Treat reports that name a date for the decision-now expected in January 2026-as provisional until confirmed by reputable outlets that cite the Home Office or RAVEC. We will keep emphasising the process so you can judge claims for yourself.