Prince Harry believes he has been “singled out” and subjected to “unjustified, inferior treatment” following his departure from royal duties, the Court of Appeal in London heard today.
The Duke of Sussex and his wife Meghan Markle “felt compelled to step back” from their senior royal roles in 2020 because they believed the institution was failing to offer them adequate protection, according to his barrister, Shaheed Fatima KC.
Harry has flown over 5,000 miles from California to attend the two-day hearing in person, challenging a previous ruling that denied him, Meghan, and their children Archie and Lilibet automatic taxpayer-funded police protection while in the UK.
However, the Home Office’s legal representative pushed back, arguing that Harry’s appeal shows “a continued failure to see the wood for the trees.”
The legal battle comes amid reports from MailOnline suggesting that Harry did not see his father, King Charles, before the monarch left for a four-day state visit to Italy earlier this week.
The Duke is appealing the High Court’s dismissal of his lawsuit against the Home Office, which upheld a decision by the Executive Committee for the Protection of Royalty and Public Figures (Ravec). The committee had determined that Harry should receive a different level of security now that he is no longer a working royal. The case has already cost UK taxpayers an estimated £500,000.
Opening arguments were delivered this morning by Ms. Fatima, with Prince Harry seated just behind her in court. She argued that Harry had received unfair treatment when the Metropolitan Police protection he once had was downgraded.
“When Ravec made its February 2020 decision regarding the appellant’s security, it failed to apply its own terms of reference,” she stated, arguing instead that the committee used a “different and so-called ‘bespoke process.’”
She added, “The appellant does not accept that ‘bespoke’ equates to ‘better.’ On the contrary, he believes it shows he has been singled out for unequal, unjustified, and substandard treatment.”
