Prince Harry has launched his battle for police protection in the UK, making arguments as to why taxpayer-funded security should be provided to him.
The start of his three-day court hearing in London kicked off on Tuesday, December 5 and while he was not in attendance, his attorney, Shaheed Fatima, argued against a decision made in February 2020 to strip him of taxpayer-funded police security when he visits Britain.
The decision, made by the Executive Committee for the Protection of Royalty and Public Figures (RAVEC), occurred when he and his wife Meghan Markle stepped down as "working royals."
"This case is about the right to safety and security of a person. There could not be a right of greater importance to any of us," Fatima said in court, according to Vanity Fair.
Harry's attorneys told People in a statement Tuesday that 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. RAVEC should have considered, in particular, the impact on the U.K.'s reputation of a successful attack on the claimant."
However, the UK Home Office claims protection for Harry and his family should be decided on a "case-by-case basis" since he's no longer a "working member of the Royal Family and would be living abroad for the majority of the time."
Harry even offered to pay for his protection across the pond, but lost that legal bid in May.
Following that ruling, a judge granted permission for a full hearing to take place that would review the Home Office's decision to strip the Sussexes of security.
The hearing is one of the five High Court claims Harry is involved in, another of which includes his legal bout with UK tabloids over alleged phone-hacking claims.
Comments