Prince Harry found himself back in a London courtroom recently, engaged in a critical legal struggle over his personal security in the U.K.
The stakes have never been higher, as his lawyer, Shaheed Fatima KC, passionately asserted that the Duke’s very life hangs in the balance.
During her closing arguments, Fatima didn’t hold back.
She made it clear to the court that Harry’s situation is not just a matter of policy or procedure.
“There’s a person sitting behind me whose safety, security, and life are at stake,” she emphasized.
Her statement underscored the gravity of Harry’s plea, highlighting the unique circumstances that have led him to seek enhanced protection for himself and his family.
At the heart of this case is a 2020 ruling from the U.K. government that stripped Harry and his wife, Meghan, Duchess of Sussex, of automatic taxpayer-funded police protection after their departure from royal duties.
This decision was made by the Executive Committee for the Protection of Royalty and Public Figures, commonly known as RAVEC, which determined that security would now be handled on a situational basis rather than as a given for the family.
Harry has argued fiercely against this decision, maintaining that since stepping back from royal duties, his security vulnerabilities have only intensified.
He pointed to threats from extremist groups, including claims from al-Qaeda that have allegedly sought his assassination, as evidence of the substantial risk he faces while in his home country.
The bleak reality is that Harry doesn’t feel safe bringing his family to the U.K. since the risks have escalated.
Following their relocation to California, where they raise their children, Archie and Lilibet, the family has not traveled to the U.K. together since 2022.
It seems their last trip was for the Platinum Jubilee celebrations of Harry’s late grandmother, Queen Elizabeth II.
Harry arrived solo for the recent hearings, without the comfort of his wife or any support from his royal relatives.
While he was engaged in this crucial legal battle, his father, King Charles III, was away in Rome on a state visit, and his brother, Prince William, resides just outside London, around 30 minutes away.
The tension in the courtroom was palpable, as Harry’s barrister pointed to RAVEC’s decision-making process and questioned its fairness.
Fatima argued that the committee did not consult with an “expert specialist body” to assess Harry’s security risks adequately, providing what she termed a “bespoke process” that she claimed was unjustly inferior.
In defense of their actions, the Home Office’s representative asserted that the tailored security arrangements were indeed flexible and took into account Harry’s unique situation.
Sir James Eadie KC presented the view that there are benefits to assessing security based on individual circumstances rather than applying a blanket policy.
Despite the lack of a formal risk assessment by the risk management board in Harry’s case, Eadie maintained that RAVEC’s operational procedures are not rigid and can adapt as needed.
He argued that the team is experienced enough to handle such sensitive matters adequately.
Throughout the appeals process, judges were made aware that Harry doesn’t seek to reinstate the automatic protection he once had as a royal but rather wants to be evaluated for security in a manner consistent with other individuals who require protective measures.
As legal proceedings unfolded this week, parts of the hearing were conducted in private, owing to the sensitive nature of the case.
Emotions ran high, with members of the public voicing their support for the Harry, demonstrating the public’s interest in this ongoing saga.
Now, all eyes are on the trio of judges—Sir Geoffrey Vos, Lord Justice Bean, and Lord Justice Edis—who will eventually deliver their verdict on this complex and high-stakes case.
The outcome remains uncertain, but one thing is clear: for Prince Harry, the battle for his safety is far from over.
Read more
