The Duke of Sussex has cited reasons for his security concerns, asserting that his safety and that of his family are at risk due to the hostility directed towards them on social media and in the press. His attorney, Sashed Fatima, contends that the Royal and VIP Executive Committee (R) failed to follow its own policies and acted unfairly in evaluating Prince Harry's security needs. Fatima underscores the need for a proper risk analysis considering Prince Harry's background, profile within the royal family, and his permanent status as a member of that family.
Furthermore, Fatima argues that the potential impact on the UK's reputation should there be a successful security breach targeting Prince Harry needs to be considered seriously. However, Prince Harry himself was not present in the courtroom as lawyers presented their opening remarks during the initial three-day hearing at London's High Court. A judgment on this matter is expected to be delivered at a later date.
Prince Harry's legal team has also voiced criticism regarding the arrangements for his security during King Charles II's coronation. On the other hand, the UK's Home Office has maintained its stance on this issue. The government's attorney, James Eddie, pointed out that Prince Harry is no longer part of the group of individuals whose security is subject to regular review. He also mentioned budget constraints, emphasizing that security funds are not limitless.
Highlighting a specific incident, Prince Harry claimed that he was chased by photographers after attending a charity event at Kew Gardens in West London in June 2021. However, lawyers have been examining the details behind closed doors. Recent developments have included the emergence of footage showing that nothing untoward happened as Prince Harry's vehicle left Kew Gardens. This has cast doubt on the veracity of his claims about being pursued by paparazzi.
In the midst of these legal proceedings, allegations have arisen suggesting that the Sussexes themselves may have had some involvement in tipping off photographers in the past. Some have questioned the consistency of their public image, citing concerns about authenticity in their activism, philanthropy, and their interactions with the royal family. These ongoing developments are sparking considerable debate and scrutiny.
