Prince Harry’s ‘life is at stake’ over safety, his lawyer warns Court of Appeal on closing day of problem | EUROtoday

Prince Harry’s “life is at stake” within the conflict over his UK safety preparations, his lawyer has warned the Court of Appeal on the ultimate day of the duke’s authorized problem.

The Duke of Sussex is difficult the dismissal of his High Court declare in opposition to the Home Office over the choice of the Executive Committee for the Protection of Royalty and Public Figures (Ravec) that he ought to obtain a distinct diploma of safety when within the UK.

In her closing submissions, Shaheed Fatima KC, for the duke, informed the courtroom: “One must not forget the human dimension to this case. There is a person sitting behind me whose safety, whose security, and whose life is at stake.

“There is a person sitting behind me who is being told he is getting a special bespoke process when he knows and has experienced a process that is manifestly inferior in every respect.”

In what his barrister mentioned was an illustration of how vital the case is to him and his household, the 40-year-old duke, who lives within the US, attended the Royal Courts of Justice in central London for the two-day listening to.

open picture in gallery

After arriving at round 10.10am forward of the second day on Wednesday, Harry, carrying a darkish blue swimsuit, may very well be seen taking notes and quietly speaking with members of his authorized workforce throughout elements of the listening to.

When the proceedings have been paused early within the afternoon, the duke was being escorted out of courtroom by his safety element when a member of the general public shouted her help for him in a dramatic outburst, including: “If you’re members of the press, you’re the reason he’s no longer in England.”

Describing how choices over Harry’s safety have been made in a “unique set of circumstances”, a lawyer for the Home Office informed the courtroom within the morning: “There is nothing about the appellant’s announcement in January 2020 that he was to step back from his role in the royal family and spend most of his time abroad that was usual.”

In his oral submissions, Sir James Eadie KC added: “It was a category of its own.”

The enchantment comes after retired High Court decide Sir Peter Lane dominated final yr that Ravec’s resolution, taken in early 2020 after the Duke and Duchess of Sussex give up as senior working royals, was lawful.

Ravec has delegated accountability from the Home Office over the supply of protecting safety preparations for members of the royal household and others, with involvement from the Metropolitan Police, the Cabinet Office and the royal family.

Ms Fatima beforehand mentioned that Ravec got here up with a “different and so-called bespoke process” for Harry.

She continued: “The appellant 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.”

Ms Fatima informed judges that the bespoke course of concerned Ravec contemplating why Harry would attend a selected occasion “even though that is plainly irrelevant to the question of security”.

The Home Office is defending the enchantment, beforehand telling the courtroom the problem “involves a continued failure to see the wood for the trees, advancing propositions available only by reading small parts of the evidence, and now the judgment, out of context and ignoring the totality of the picture”.

Parts of Wednesday’s listening to earlier than Sir Geoffrey Vos, Lord Justice Bean, and Lord Justice Edis have been heard in non-public, with out members of the press or public, although the duke was allowed to stay.

During the general public a part of the listening to, Sir James mentioned that the committee doesn’t proceed “by way of comparison” between individuals underneath its remit.

He mentioned: “That is for the obvious reason that it is highly unlikely that two cases will ever in truth be the same, when judged against the broad guiding principles that apply.”

In Tuesday’s listening to, Ms Fatima informed the courtroom that the failure to do a danger administration board evaluation for Harry meant that Ravec “did not have the expert analysis that it needed” to find out whether or not the duke needs to be handled like individuals in an “other VIP” class.

She continued: “Ravec did not make a reasonable decision because the appellant’s position is analogous to those in that ‘other VIP’ category.

“Had the judge properly evaluated the evidence, he would have come to that conclusion.”

Ms Fatima additionally mentioned: “The appellant’s case is not that he should automatically be entitled to the same protection as he was previously given when he was a working member of the royal family.

“The appellant’s case is that he should be considered under the terms of reference and subject to the same process as any other individual being considered for protective security by Ravec, unless there is a cogent reason to the contrary.”

At the top of the listening to, decide Sir Geoffrey Vos mentioned the Court of Appeal’s resolution can be given in writing at a later date, which was “most unlikely” to be earlier than Easter, including: “Plainly we will take our time to consider our judgments.”