What are Prince Harry's UK security arrangements that make it 'impossible' for Meghan

has claimed that safely after .

His statement comes five years after he stepped back as a working member of the in January 2020. In a statement released at the time, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex said they would “work to become financially independent” but would continue “to honour our duty to the Queen, the Commonwealth, and our patronages”.

Following their departure, and Meghan moved to California and no longer had an official residence in the UK. After stepping back from their official royal duties, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex’s security when in the UK was downgraded and they were no longer granted the arrangements that had been afforded to them as senior royals.

READ MORE:

The Executive Committee for the Protection of Royalty and Public Figures (Ravec), which is a committee that authorises security for senior royals on behalf of the Home Office, deduced that Prince Harry wouldn’t frequently visit the UK. As a result, they concluded his security needs should be assessed on a case-by-case basis – the same way needs are assessed for other high-profile visitors.

This meant that while the would get police protection in the UK, it wouldn’t be automatic and he’d be required to give plenty of notice ahead of time.

However, Prince Harry challenged the way Ravec took the decision regarding his security arrangements. . He added: “The UK is central to the heritage of my children. That cannot happen if it's not possible to keep them safe.”

Lawyers for the Home Office argued that Prince Harry would still have publicly funded police security when in the UK on a “bespoke” basis.

Prince Harry then challenged the dismissal of his High Court claim and . The Home Office opposed the appeal, with its lawyers telling the court that Ravec’s decision was taken in a “unique set of circumstances” and that there was "no proper basis" for challenging it.

Today (May 2) the Duke of Sussex lost his Court of Appeal challenge over his security arrangements while in the UK. Sir Geoffrey Vos said the arguments put forward by Harry's barrister, Shaheed Fatima KC, were “powerful and moving” and that it was “plain that the Duke of Sussex felt badly treated by the system”.

But he said: “I concluded, having studied the detail of the extensive documentation, I could not say that the duke’s sense of grievance translated into a legal argument for the challenge to Ravec’s decision." He continued: "The duke was in effect stepping in and out of the cohort of protection provided by Ravec. Outside the UK, he was outside the cohort, but when in the UK, his security would be considered as appropriate.”

He added: “It was impossible to say that this reasoning was illogical or inappropriate, indeed it seemed sensible.” Sir Geoffrey also said Ravec’s decision was “understandable and perhaps predictable”.

In an interview with the following the dismissal of his High Court claim, .

“I can't see a in which I will be bringing my wife and children back to the UK at this point and the things they are going to miss is everything. I love my country and always have done...despite what some people in that country have done," he said.

He continued: "So I miss the UK. I miss parts of the UK. Of course I do. I think it's really quite sad that I won't be able to show my children my homeland."

A Home Office spokesperson said: “We are pleased that the court has found in favour of the Government’s position in this case. The UK Government’s protective security system is rigorous and proportionate.

“It is our long-standing policy not to provide detailed information on those arrangements, as doing so could compromise their integrity and affect individuals’ security.”