Prince Harry's attorney argued against the 2020 decision to strip Harry of taxpayer-funded police security when he visits Britain

The Home Office said RAVEC had considered the "likely significant public upset" that would stem from something happening to Prince Harry and was aware of the "tragic death" of his mother, Princess Diana, who died in a car accident in 1997 after her vehicle was pursued by paparazzi.

Prince Harry has been subjected to "unlawful and unfair treatment" by the British government over the decision to take away his police protection when he is in Britain, his lawyer told London's High Court on Tuesday.

Prince Harry's been "unjustifiably treated less favourably than others" over his security arrangements when he's in the UK, the High Court has heard.

Prince Harry's lawyers are to demand his taxpayer-funded protection is restored as they claim it was unfair to remove police help.

Harry’s case is that the decision to remove his police protection in the UK after he decided to move to California with Meghan, was the wrong one. | ITV National News

This case is about the right to safety and security of a person. There could not be a right of greater importance to any of us,” Harry’s barrister Shaheed Fatima said Tuesday.

The Home Office should have taken greater heed to the impact on the UK’s reputation if a successful attack on Prince Harry were to take place, his lawyers have argued. The Duke of Sussex is challenging the UK government’s decision to strip him of security when he moved to US,

SHAMEFUL MILESTONE’ TRAGEDY LIGHTS OUT NOTHING BURGER FINITE RESOURCES Prince Harry’s lawyers argued in court Tuesday that the government was wrong to strip him of automatic police protection when visiting the U.