During a recent court appearance, Prince Harry’s attorney contended that he was treated unjustly after losing his British security detail. Following his decision to step back from royal duties in February 2020 and relocate to the United States, Harry saw his government-funded protection revoked.
A High Court ruling last year upheld a government panel’s choice to provide security for the Duke of Sussex on an as-needed basis, with the judge deeming the decision lawful and justified. However, attorney Shaheed Fatima argued that the security assessment conducted by the panel was flawed, alleging that it did not adhere to its own procedures or carry out a proper risk management evaluation. Fatima asserted that “bespoke” security arrangements did not equate to better protection, indicating instead that Harry had been unfairly singled out.
The government’s legal representative, James Eadie, countered this claim, stating that Harry’s arguments were based on an erroneous and overly formal interpretation of the government’s security considerations. He maintained that the appeal demonstrated a continued misunderstanding of the overall situation by focusing on isolated parts of the evidence, thereby ignoring the wider context.
The proceedings are being held before three judges at the Court of Appeal, with final arguments expected on Wednesday. While a portion of the hearing was conducted publicly, sensitive security details were discussed in a closed session.
Harry arrived at the court with limited personal security assistance and was careful to avoid the media as he entered. The 40-year-old prince has increasingly challenged traditional royal norms by legally contesting both the British government and tabloid press, though he has only attended a handful of court hearings in the past two years. Notably, he made headlines as the first senior royal in over a century to testify in a phone hacking case against the tabloids.
In court, Harry expressed concerns for his family’s safety during visits to the UK, citing a hostile media environment and personal threats. His attorney highlighted at least two significant security incidents post-reduction of his official protection, including chilling threats from terrorist factions and a dangerous encounter with paparazzi in New York.
In related legal matters, Harry had previously sought to privately fund police protection during his stays in the UK, a request denied by a judge who asserted that such provisions should not cater exclusively to the wealthy. He also withdrew a libel suit against the publisher of the Daily Mail regarding claims that he attempted to conceal his desire for ongoing government security.
Despite these setbacks, Harry achieved a notable victory in early 2023 against the Daily Mirror, where a judge confirmed that widespread phone hacking had occurred at the publication. In January, he received a public apology from Rupert Murdoch’s UK titles for their persistent invasion of his privacy, leading to a significant monetary settlement. He also has an ongoing case against the publisher of the Mail.