Prince Harry said he misses the UK but can't take his children there. Buckingham Palace responded.

When Prince Harry stepped back as a senior royal in 2020, his security was downgraded.

Since then, he has fought the decision in court, arguing that he needs a higher level of police protection while visiting the UK given the intense tabloid scrutiny he and his family receive.

Yesterday, the Duke of Sussex's appeal was denied.

In a sit-down interview with the BBC, Harry revealed he is "pretty gutted" by the court's ruling.

Watch: Prince Harry says he wants to reconcile with his father, King Charles. Post continues after the video.

"We thought it was going to go our way, but it certainly has proven that there was no way to win this through the courts," he told the publication.

"For the time being, it's impossible for me to take my family back to the UK safely."

Harry's comments prompted Buckingham Palace to share a rare statement about the verdict.

"All of these issues have been examined repeatedly and meticulously by the courts, with the same conclusion reached on each occasion," said a Buckingham Palace spokesperson, as published in The Sun.

'It's really quite sad I won't be able to show my children my homeland'

Since stepping back as a senior royal, the Duke of Sussex — who shares two children, Archie, six, and Lilibet, four, with his wife Meghan, Duchess of Sussex — said he has only been back to the UK for funerals, court cases, and charitable functions.

"I can't see a world in which I would be bringing my wife and children back to the UK at this point," he told BBC.

"I love my country. I always have done, despite what some people in that country have done. I think it's really quite sad that I won't be able to show my children my homeland".

Prince Harry and Meghan share two children, Archie, six, and Lilibet, four. Image: Instagram/@meghan

Prince Harry claimed he wouldn't have taken his case as far as he did if he wasn't convinced he had "compelling evidence".

"We've lost the appeal, but the other side has won in keeping me unsafe," he said.

"There's a lot of question marks that a lot of people will have. I have all of the knowledge now throughout the legal process. I've uncovered my worst fears."

He later said there remained "a lot of control and ability in [his] father's hands".

"This whole thing could be resolved through him, not necessarily by intervening but by stepping aside and allowing the experts to do what is necessary and to carry out an RMB."

An RMB is a Risk Management Board, whom Harry argued should have carried out an additional risk assessment regarding him and his family.

With regards to his father, King Charles, Prince Harry said there are "things that have happened that he can now forgive". He then admitted he will "probably always struggle to forgive" the decision in 2020 that is "knowingly putting [him and his] family at risk".

"When that decision happened, I couldn't believe it. I actually couldn't believe it," Harry said.

Despite this, the 40-year-old said he would "love reconciliation with [his] family" — but he admits that will be difficult.

"Some members of my family will never forgive me for writing a book," he said, referring to his 2023 memoir Spare.

"They will never forgive me for lots of things.

"But I would love reconciliation with my family. There's no point in continuing to fight anymore. Life is precious. I don't know how much longer my father has."

King Charles, 76, is currently undergoing treatment for an undisclosed cancer.

"He won't speak to me because of this security stuff. But it would be nice to reconcile… If they don't want that, that's entirely up to them."

What we know about Prince Harry's security court case

Until 2020, Prince Harry received full, tax-payer-funded security.

Once he stepped back as a senior royal and moved to Montecito, California, with his family, the Executive Committee for the Protection of Royalty and Public Figures (Ravec) decided he would not receive the same level of protection.

Prince Harry fought the decision in court, arguing that his private protection team does not have access to the UK intelligence information needed to keep his family safe.

"The UK will always be Prince Harry's home and a country he wants his wife and children to be safe in," his legal representation said at the time.

"With the lack of police protection comes too great a personal risk. In the absence of such protection, Prince Harry and his family are unable to return to his home."

The lawyer argued that the duke had "inherited a security risk at birth" that would never go away.

"He remains sixth in line to the throne, has served two tours of combat duty in Afghanistan, and in recent years his family has been subjected to well-documented neo-Nazi and extremist threats.

"While his role within the institution has changed, his profile as a member of the Royal Family has not. Nor has the threat to him and his family."

Prince Harry's team lost the case but decided to fight the decision, arguing that the royal had been "singled out" for "inferior treatment".

But three judges denied the appeal, ruling that while Harry's concerns were "powerful and moving", his "sense of grievance" did not "translate into a legal argument".

Judge Sir Geoffrey Vos said Ravec's decision was "understandable and perhaps predictable".

While he acknowledged that Harry did not have a risk analysis in 2020, Judge Vos said "it would have had nothing to say on the critical features of the changed situation".

"From the Duke of Sussex's point of view, something may indeed have gone wrong, in that an unintended consequence of his decision to step back from royal duties and spend the majority of his time abroad has been that he has been provided with a more bespoke, and generally lesser, level of protection than when he was in the UK.

"But that does not, of itself, give rise to a legal complaint."

Feature Image: BBC.