The Surprising Reason the Royal Family Doesn't Always Wear Seatbelts, According to a Security Expert

If you've noticed that Kate Middleton, Prince William and other members of the British royal family are often photographed in cars without seatbelts, you're not alone — and a British security expert is explaining why.

Michael Chandler recently spoke with the Daily Mail about the reasoning behind the decision, explaining that royals ride without seatbelts due to "security considerations."

"As you might imagine, there's concerns about extracting a principal from a vehicle as quickly as possible," Chandler said.

"It's likely there's a risk-based approach," he added. "There'll be a risk assessment, the outcome of which will determine whether or not there needs to be extra precautions."

Comfort and appearance also play a part, especially for events where the royals need to be in military uniform or formal attire.

"If they're in and out of a vehicle, royals will be less inclined to fit their seatbelt every time,” Chandler explained. "With men, for example, a seatbelt can crease shirts and so that might also be a factor."

Royals are often photographed in cars as they near their destination, and Chandler explains they don't always ride without a safety belt.

"They do actually wear seatbelts, probably much more than people realize," he said. "On those occasions where they're traveling relatively quickly through London or on motorways, they will certainly wear seatbelts.'

It's unlikely that any of the royals will have legal repercussions for going sans seatbelt, and the reason why is simple when it comes to King Charles, who has sovereign immunity from prosecution.

“Under a very old piece of legislation, the Bill of Rights from 1689, the monarchy was established to be above legal challenges and courts,” noted Chandler, who, in addition to his security expertise, also has a law degree.

“More recently,” he continued, “the Crown Proceedings Act of 1947 allowed lawsuits against Government and Crown departments but explicitly excluded the Monarch.”

As for other royals, the “risk-based assessment” comes into play. Security decisions made by protection officers are unlikely to be challenged by other members of law enforcement. 

"It doesn't legally exempt them if they're not traveling for a ceremonial duty, but they're unlikely to be arrested when it was a decision made by someone who's looking after them,” Chandler explained. “In short, the police who provide the protection aren't likely to be challenged by their policing colleagues.”

“Regulation 6E of the Road Traffic Act, updated in 1993, states that for vehicles that are used for police, fire and rescue services, seatbelts used by those parties are exempt,” he continued. “That will include diplomatic protection because it's an office of the Metropolitan Police.”

Can't get enough of PEOPLE's Royals coverage? Sign up for our free Royals newsletter to get the latest update.

The decision for the royal family to forego seatbelts at times may come as a surprise, especially in light of the Paris car accident that led to Princess Diana's death in 1997. Diana, her boyfriend Dodi Fayed and driver Henri Paul died in the crash in the Pont de l'Alma tunnel while Fayed's bodyguard, Trevor Rees-Jones, sustained serious injuries.

An investigation found that none of the car's occupants were wearing seatbelts at the time of the crash.

In August 2022, David Douglas — a former senior officer in the Metropolitan Police, who helped assemble the official Operation Paget report into the crash — said that evidence indicated that seatbelts could have saved the lives of the passengers.

"If they had been wearing seatbelts, our experts tell us there was probably an 80% chance that they would have survived the accident," he told Good Morning Britain. "It would still have been a terrible accident, they would have been badly injured, but it probably would not have been fatal."