City_Spanish
VIP Memeber
- Posts
- 839
- Posts Power
- 839.0%
- Liked
- 3
- Joined
- Jul 19, 2023
Lawyers for Prince Harry have argued that he's been treated "less favourably" than other members of the British royal family when it comes to police protection.
Harry's High Court hearing started in London on Tuesday, with the Duke of Sussex taking legal action against the U.K. Home Office over a decision to downgrade his personal protective security after he stopped being a "working royal".
In a written submission, Harry's lawyer Shaheed Fatima KC argued the 39-year-old royal should be given "state security in light of the threats/risks he faces", adding he has "unjustifiably, been treated less favourably than others".
The level of state security arranged for Harry is now dependent on the perceived risk to him when he visits the U.K., following a decision made by the Executive Committee for the Protection of Royalty and Public Figures (Ravec).
The royal's lawyers argued Harry hadn't been treated in the same way as others and there had been a lack of transparency about the ruling.
The submission, which has been heavily redacted, also stated, "Ravec should have considered the 'impact' that a successful attack on the claimant would have, bearing in mind his status, background and profile within the royal family - which he was born into and which he will have for the rest of his life - and his ongoing charity work and service to the public."
Harry, who is based in the U.S. with his wife Meghan, Duchess of Sussex and their two young children Archie and Lilibet, is not expected to attend the High Court hearing.
Harry's barrister opened the case by arguing that the right to security and safety of a person "cannot be of greater importance".
Most of the case will be heard in private and is scheduled to last three days, with a decision expected at a later date.
Harry's High Court hearing started in London on Tuesday, with the Duke of Sussex taking legal action against the U.K. Home Office over a decision to downgrade his personal protective security after he stopped being a "working royal".
In a written submission, Harry's lawyer Shaheed Fatima KC argued the 39-year-old royal should be given "state security in light of the threats/risks he faces", adding he has "unjustifiably, been treated less favourably than others".
The level of state security arranged for Harry is now dependent on the perceived risk to him when he visits the U.K., following a decision made by the Executive Committee for the Protection of Royalty and Public Figures (Ravec).
The royal's lawyers argued Harry hadn't been treated in the same way as others and there had been a lack of transparency about the ruling.
The submission, which has been heavily redacted, also stated, "Ravec should have considered the 'impact' that a successful attack on the claimant would have, bearing in mind his status, background and profile within the royal family - which he was born into and which he will have for the rest of his life - and his ongoing charity work and service to the public."
Harry, who is based in the U.S. with his wife Meghan, Duchess of Sussex and their two young children Archie and Lilibet, is not expected to attend the High Court hearing.
Harry's barrister opened the case by arguing that the right to security and safety of a person "cannot be of greater importance".
Most of the case will be heard in private and is scheduled to last three days, with a decision expected at a later date.