The Albany Gazette - Prince Harry's lawyer cites threats in UK protection case

Harry, who has been angered by the government's decision, watched proceedings unfold from inside London's Royal Courts of Justice during a rare visit to London.

Following Harry's dramatic split with the royal family in 2020 and subsequent move to North America with his wife Meghan, they are no longer considered as working royals.

The British government said he would therefore no longer be given the "same degree" of publicly funded protection when in the UK, but solely on a case-by-case basis.

The 40-year-old prince took legal action against the interior ministry and, after his initial case was rejected last year, has now brought the challenge before the Court of Appeal in central London.

In a written submission, the prince's lawyers warned of threats made against the royal's security.

"Al-Qaeda recently called for (Harry) to be murdered," and he and Meghan were "involved in a dangerous car pursuit with paparazzi in New York City" in May 2023, the submission said.

And his lawyer Shaheed Fatima said the prince "does not accept that 'bespoke' means 'better'."

"In fact, in his submission, it means that he has been singled out for different, unjustified and inferior treatment."

- 'Forced to step back' -

The Duke of Sussex and his American wife Meghan Markle are now largely estranged from the royal family, having started a new life in California.

But King Charles III's younger son has said security concerns have hampered his ability to visit home and he has only rarely returned to the UK for short visits.

In a written submission to the appeals court, Harry's lawyers said the prince and Meghan "felt forced to step back" from frontline royal duties because "they considered they were not being protected by the institution".

Harry was widely criticised when in his autobiography "Spare" he claimed to have killed 25 people in Afghanistan, sparking ire from the Taliban.

Harry's mother, Princess Diana, was killed in a high-speed car crash in Paris in 1997 as she tried to escape paparazzi photographers.

The prince's legal battle centres on a February 2020 decision to downgrade his security, made by the UK's interior ministry and a committee that deals with the protection of royals and public figures.

The High Court ruled in February 2024 against Harry's case, saying the government had acted lawfully.

The prince's initial bid to appeal was refused in April 2024 and he was ordered to pay about £1,000,000 ($1.27 million) in legal costs, according to The Times newspaper.

However, the following month, a judge said Harry could in fact challenge the decision at the Court of Appeal.

Fatima argued the committee had failed to carry out an assessment of the risks posed to Harry and the High Court had been wrong to overlook that.

- 'Right to safety' -

"This appeal concerns the most fundamental right -- to safety and security of person," Fatima said on Tuesday.

Harry, dressed in a dark suit with blue patterned tie, looked on in the courtroom, occasionally whispering into the ear of another member of his legal team, or writing in a notebook.

In its submission to the court, the government insisted Harry's security "would be considered depending on the circumstances" given his change of position.

The hearing is expected to finish on Wednesday, with some parts to be held in private due to security concerns.

A decision in writing is expected at a later date.

Harry, who has pursued several legal suits against British UK tabloid dailies, is also embroiled in a separate row over a charity he co-founded in southern Africa.

A bitter boardroom battle has seen the prince resign as patron of the Sentebale charity.

Its chair, Sophie Chandauka, has accused him of "bullying" and being involved in a "cover up".

Harry has in turn hit out at what he called "blatant lies" and the UK-based charity watchdog has launched an investigation.

(T.Brown--TAG)