(London) The High Court in London began examining on Tuesday the procedure launched by Prince Harry to challenge the cessation of the systematic management of his security when he is in the United Kingdom.
The Duke of Sussex, youngest son of King Charles III and his wife Meghan, lost this systematic protection from the police, granted at the expense of the British taxpayer, after deciding to withdraw from the royal family in 2020 and to settle in the United States.
Concretely, Harry’s appeal against the British Interior Ministry concerns the decision taken by the authorities in February 2020 to grant the Duke of Sussex police protection on a case-by-case basis.
Presenting the case at the hearing, where the Duke of Sussex was not present, his lawyer, Shaheed Fatima, said the case was about the prince’s right to “security” when he is in the Kingdom -United.
A decision-making process “on a case-by-case basis results in excessive uncertainty” for the prince and those responsible for his security, she argued in her written statement.
She also highlighted the impact that a successful attack on the Duke of Sussex could have on the reputation of the United Kingdom, due to “his status, his background and his position within the royal family”.
” Status change ”
At the hearing, Home Office lawyer James Eadie defended the decision by Ravec – the body responsible for the security of members of the royal family and most important public figures – to grant Prince Harry “tailor-made” protection, “in certain circumstances” and “depending on the context” surrounding his travels in the United Kingdom.
This decision resulted from “the change in status that (the Duke of Sussex) decided to make by becoming a member without official function of the royal family”, he justified.
Talking about “tailor-made” security is just another way of describing “the failure (of Ravec) to respect its rules,” retorted Harry’s lawyer.
The Duke of Sussex is only asking for “legal review of his case” regarding his protection, she concluded.
The rest of the debates, scheduled until Thursday, will be held largely behind closed doors, due to the confidential security information that will be discussed.
Prince Harry, who therefore sometimes has to resort to private protection at his own expense, had requested to be able to benefit from police protection, paying with his personal funds, when he is in the United Kingdom, but this request was was rejected by the courts last May.
The question of his safety was brought back to the forefront in mid-May, when the prince and his wife were followed by car in New York by paparazzi.
Harry holds the press and paparazzi responsible for the August 31, 1997 car crash in Paris that killed his mother, Lady Di.
The prince is also leading a legal offensive in the United Kingdom against the actions of several tabloids towards him.