Harry Moan Latest: Royal Exile Whines He Was 'Singled Out' for 'Inferior Treatment' After Losing His Battle For Publicly-Funded Security
Prince Harry is back in the U.K. to appeal a decision preventing him from having taxpayer funded security.
April 8 2025, Published 12:28 p.m. ET
Prince Harry has moaned he's been "singled out for inferior treatment" after losing his bid for publicly-funded security while he's back in the U.K.
RadarOnline.com can reveal the Duke of Sussex's appeal over the decision has been met with force after he brought a case against the Home Office and the Executive Committee for the Protection of Royalty and Public Figures (Ravec.)
Harry whined he's been 'singled out for inferior treatment' after he was denied funding for his security when in the U.K.
Harry, 40, claimed he was "singled out" after his round-the-clock royal protection was stripped in the wake of his move to the U.S. with wife Megan Markle, 43.
He also attempted to sue the Home Office because it refused to spend U.K. taxpayers' money on bodyguards after he left the Royal Family.
But in February last year, High Court judge Sir Peter Lane rejected the duke's case and ruled Ravec's approach was not irrational or procedurally unfair.
Harry has now returned to the Court of Appeal in London for a two-day hearing against the ruling.
His lawyer Shaheed Fatima KC claimed Harry has been "singled out for different, unjustified and inferior treatment".
Harry's lawyer highlighted 'recent security incidents' including Al-Qaeda threats.
But lawyers for the U.K. government have claimed that while Harry "disagrees vehemently" with his security arrangements, his views are "largely irrelevant".
Ms Fatima told the court Ravec came up with a "bespoke" process not applied to anyone else, but that Harry doesn't accept bespoke means "better".
She continued: "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."
In court documents, his team highlighted "recent security incidents" surrounding the Duke.
This included Al-Qaeda calling for Harry "to be murdered" after Ravec's decision in February 2020 to change his level of security.
Another refers to a May 2023 incident after "(Prince Harry) and his wife were involved in a dangerous car pursuit with paparazzi in New York City".
The papers added: "No formal charges were brought but the investigation found reckless disregard of vehicle and traffic laws and persistently dangerous and unacceptable behaviour on the part of the paparazzi”.
Harry and his wife Meghan Markle lost their right to funded security in the U.K. when they moved to America.
Never Miss an
Daily updates from the heart of Hollywood, right to your inbox
By entering your email and clicking Sign Up, you’re agreeing to let us send you customized marketing messages about us and our advertising partners. You are also agreeing to our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy.
Ms Fatima argued Ravec's failure to do an RMB (risk management board assessment) for Harry may have led to a mistake.
She said the body did not have the expert analysis it needed to consider whether or not Harry should be treated similarly to those in the "other VIP" category.
The lawyer argued Harry has still not been given an RMB analysis "despite recent security incidents."
In their own written arguments, the government say Harry's "bare disagreement" with the decision to remove his security "does not amount to a ground of appeal".
The Home Office also claim they did not act "irrationally" and the previous judge was right to dismiss Harry's claim.
Barrister Sir James Eadie KC argued his appeal "involves a continued failure to see the wood for the trees."
