Lawyers for Prince Harry launched a court challenge on Tuesday against his security arrangements in the UK, following his departure from frontline royal duties and relocation to North America.
The case concerning his loss of UK taxpayer-funded protection is the most recent in a series of legal processes started by Harry, whose father is King Charles III.
Harry is suing the UK interior ministry over a decision made by a committee dealing with the security of members of the royal family in February 2020.
The Duke of Sussex, as he is formally known, had been informed that he would no longer be provided with the “same degree” of personal protective security that he had previously received.
Shaheed Fatima, representing Harry, told the London High Court that the action was about the prince’s right to “safety and security.”
She said in written submissions that the committee should have considered the implications of any harm to Harry on the UK’s reputation when deciding to reduce his protective security when visiting the UK from his new residence in California.
She emphasized the significance of his “status, background, and profile within the royal family — which he was born into.”
In response, Home Office lawyer James Eadie stated that Harry was treated in a legitimate “bespoke manner” when it came to his protection on visits home.
The committee does consider “the risk of a successful attack on that individual” when considering protection.
“As a result of the fact that he would no longer be a working member of the royal family, and would be living abroad for the majority of the time, his position had materially changed,” he argued.
“In those circumstances, protective security would not be provided on the same basis as before.”
Princess Diana, who was stripped of the title “Her Royal Highness” after her divorce from Charles, died in a high-speed vehicle crash in Paris in 1997 while attempting to avoid paparazzi photographers.
In May, Harry was denied a court review of a government decision that denied him permission to pay for his own specialist UK police security.
Lawyers for the interior ministry stated that it was “not appropriate” for wealthy people to “buy” protected security when the ministry had ruled that such protection should not be paid for by the taxpayer.
The Metropolitan Police in London also objected to Harry’s offer, claiming that it would be inappropriate to “place officers in danger in exchange for a fee paid by a private individual.”