Prince Harry He was unfairly dealt with when he was stripped of his British security detail, his lawyer said on Tuesday in the court of appeal.
Harry, the rare appearance in court indicated the importance of the case for him, lost the government funded protection in February 2020 after he abandoned his role as a royal member of the royal family and moved to the United States.
A high court judge ruled last year That the decision of the government group to provide « tailor -made » security to the Duke of Sussex was not illegal, irrational or unjustified.
But lawyer Shaheed Fatima argued that a group that evaluated Harry’s security needs could not follow their own process and evaluate risk management.
« The appeal does not accept that in size means better, » said Fatima. « In fact, in its submission, it means that it has been distinguished for a different, unjustified and lower treatment. »
A government lawyer said that Harry’s argument in the lower court was precisely found based on an « inadequate formalist interpretation » of the government’s security review that was mistakenly conceived.
« The attractiveness is characterized in the same way, » said lawyer James Eadie. « This is a continuous failure to see the wood of the trees, advancing the propositions available only by reading small parts of the evidence and now the judgment, out of context and ignoring the entire image. »
Get National News
For the news that affects Canada and the whole world, sign up for the news alerts that give you directly when they pass.
The hearing before three judges of the Appeal Court must be completed on Wednesday and a written decision is expected. While the audience was played live, some had to be held behind closed doors to discuss sensitive security details.
Harry arrived in court with a small security detail complemented by court officers. He shaped the cameras before disappearing in a private ticket.
Harry, 40, of King Charles III, has won the Royal Family Convention, bringing the government and the Tabloid press to the court, where he has a mixed record.
But Harry is rarely presented to court audiences, making only some appearances in the last two years. This included the judgment of one of its cases of telephone piracy against the British tabloids when he was the first senior member of the royal family to enter the witness box in more than a century.
Harry stated that he and his family are in danger of extinction when they visit their homeland because of the hostility addressed to him and his wife Meghan, Duchess of Sussex, on social media and through the relentless news of the media.
After denying government -sponsored protection, Harry faced at least two serious security threats, said his lawyer in court. Al-Qaeda had published a document that said that Harry’s murder would like Muslims and that he and his wife were involved in a dangerous persecution of Paparazzi in New York.
He lost a related case in which he sought permission to pay private for a police detail when in the United Kingdom, but a judge denied this offer after a government lawyer argued that agents should not be used as « private bodyguards for the rich. »
Harry also abandoned a case of dissemination against the publisher of the Daily Mail for an article saying he had sought to hide his efforts to continue receiving security funded by the Government.
But he won a significant victory at the trial in 2023 against the publisher of the Daily Mirror when a judge found that the telephone piracy on the tabloid was « widespread and habitual ». He claimed a « monumental » victory in January when the United Kingdom Tabloids of Rupert Murdoch made an unprecedented apology for intruding for his life for years and agreed to pay substantial damage to resolve his lawsuit in Privacy invasion.
It has a similar case pending against the publisher of the mail.
& Copy 2025 The Canadian Press
Leave a Reply