Prince Harry challenges the decision to strip him of security in Britain after he moved to US

On Tuesday, Prince Harry’s legal representative challenged the British government’s decision to remove his security detail following his relocation to the United States and his step back from active royal duties.

The Duke of Sussex has expressed concerns for his safety, citing negative social media sentiments and persistent media scrutiny.

His lawyer, Shaheed Fatima, criticized the Royal and VIP Executive Committee (RAVEC) for not conducting a thorough risk assessment as per their guidelines, arguing that Harry’s unique position and lifelong royal status warrant special consideration for his security.

The lawyer emphasized the potential damage to the UK’s image in case of an attack on Harry, highlighting the necessity of reassessing his security needs.

In related news, Prince Harry and Meghan Markle have spoken about the detrimental effects of social media on youth mental health. Harry has also shared his experiences of lacking support post-Afghanistan in a Netflix series. Additionally, a conservative US group has cited Harry’s past drug use in a request to release his visa records.

A three-day hearing at London’s High Court, involving multiple legal battles of Prince Harry against the UK government and British tabloids, is currently underway. Harry was absent from the opening remarks of the hearing, which is mostly conducted privately due to sensitive security discussions. The judge’s decision will be announced later.

Harry’s earlier request to pay for his security during UK visits was rejected, with a government lawyer stating police officers shouldn’t act as “private bodyguards for the wealthy.”

Harry, son of King Charles III, has voiced concerns about the safety of his wife Meghan Markle and their children in the UK. His distrust of the press dates back to his mother Princess Diana’s death in 1997, exacerbated by the media’s alleged racist attitudes and invasions of privacy.

The prince, now 39, residing in California, challenges the decision to provide him security on a “case by case” basis. Government attorney James Eadie argues that Harry’s altered royal status affects his security entitlement, also citing budget constraints.

Harry contends the committee’s decision was made without his input and lacked transparency. He points out conflicts of interest, particularly involving Edward Young, Queen Elizabeth II’s former assistant private secretary.

The Home Office dismisses any relevance of tensions between Harry and royal staff to the committee’s decision, upholding its right to make such determinations given Harry’s relinquished royal role.

This case is among five pending lawsuits Harry has in the High Court, including libel and unlawful journalism practices against major British tabloids.

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) about Prince Harry Security Challenge

More about Prince Harry Security Challenge

• Prince Harry challenges UK government decision on security
• Prince Harry’s concerns about social media and media scrutiny
• RAVEC’s role in evaluating Prince Harry’s security
• Prince Harry’s legal battles against the UK government and tabloids
• Outcome of Prince Harry’s earlier request for private security
• Prince Harry’s historical distrust of the press
• Details of Prince Harry’s challenge to the security decision