The Duke of Sussex’s long-running safety battle is not just about personal protection but public risk too
Prince Harry’s ongoing fight over security arrangements has taken on new meaning, with royal experts suggesting the issue affects more than just his immediate family.
The past year brought several setbacks for the Duke of Sussex, including his legal loss against the Home Office over UK security and his departure from Sentebale, the charity he co-founded in memory of his mother. The controversy surrounding Africa Parks followed soon after, though Harry largely stayed silent throughout.
Against that backdrop, royal commentator Afua Hagan believes the year ahead could offer a reset, particularly if the Executive Committee for the Protection of Royalty and Public Figures agrees to review his current security status as a non-working royal.
Speaking to the Express, she said improved arrangements could allow Harry to visit the UK more freely and rebuild strained family ties. As she put it, Britain remains his home, and feeling unsafe returning must be both emotionally heavy and deeply unsettling.
Hagan argued that lifting that burden could help Harry focus on reconnecting with his father rather than constantly worrying about the safety of himself, Meghan Markle, and their children.
Royal commentator Richard Fitzwilliams agreed that security remains a sensitive issue, noting that the trauma Harry experienced following his mother’s death still shapes his outlook. He acknowledged that there are genuine threats and that there was always a rationale for treating Harry’s case differently.
However, Fitzwilliams cautioned that any change to Harry’s protection is unlikely to improve his standing with the British public, particularly at a time when royal finances are under close parliamentary scrutiny.
Hagan, though, stressed that the debate should not be framed purely around Harry. In her view, security also protects the wider public.
She warned that any attack would not only endanger Harry and his family but also members of the public nearby. For that reason, she argued that state-funded, coordinated protection makes practical sense for someone so globally recognisable.
In the end, she said, the issue is not just about keeping Harry safe. It is about ensuring public safety as well.
