The Duke of Sussex has come under fire after his lawyers revealed “significant tensions” between him and the Queen’s private secretary, Sir Edward Young, during a hearing on his security in Britain. Shaheed Fatima, a lawyer representing Harry, told the High Court in London it was not “appropriate” for Young or any other member of the royal household to be involved in decisions about the Duke’s security status in the UK.
She said Harry had been assured that the government’s decision on his security would be “independent”.
Ms Fatima added: “There were significant tensions between [Harry] and Sir Edward Young.”
To which the judge, Mr Justice Swift, replied, “That’s quite a bold submission to make.”
But Australian royal writer Daniela Elser wondered why Harry is “waging war” when it “appears to have no direct impact on his daily life”.
Writing for NZ Herald, she said: “Now the options open to an entrepreneurial HRH looking to make it into the 21st century are virtually endless. And yet, despite this, one of the interesting things that has come into the picture this week is something that Harry just won’t — or may not — be able to do.”
She gave a two-word warning and said, “Go on.”
READ MORE: Prince Harry ‘can’t let go of past’ despite new life in California
She added: “But the biggest question in all of this is, why? Why is Harry going to put up such an expense (this case could end up being well into the six figures by the time it’s done and dusted) and what must surely be a lot of stress, to go to war over a decision that doesn’t seem right? have any direct impact on his daily life?”
The Duke of Sussex lost the right to government-funded protection when he stepped down as a senior royal and his battle with the government erupted when he was told he could not privately pay the armed police for the same level of protection as the rest of the royal family. during his visits to the United Kingdom.
Prince Harry’s “tensions” with the Queen’s closest aide were also described as “irrelevant” to his change in status during a hearing on the Duke of Sussex’s security in the UK.
NOT MISSING
Royal Family LIVE: Prince Harry ready to deliver IMPORTANT speech [BLOG]
Meghan Markle And Prince Harry’s Hidden NY Teaser Show Suspended [INFO]
Owen Jones demands royals face Prince Harry’s ‘messy’ memoir [CLAIM]
Sir James Eadie QC, who represented the Home Office at a hearing before the Royal Courts of Justice on July 7, said in written arguments that any tensions between Prince Harry and officials of the Royal Household are “irrelevant” to his change in status. .
He said: “In his skeleton, the plaintiff now refers to objections he allegedly made against any role played by Royal House officials in Ravec’s decision-making – apparently because of personal tensions he felt with them.
“But there is no bias and such tensions are irrelevant to the undisputed fact of the plaintiff’s change of status that led to Ravec’s decision.
“The plaintiff’s inability to explain even now how a process of representation could or would have helped is striking.”
Ravec is the executive committee for the protection of royalty and public figures.
Meghan and Harry lost their taxpayer-funded police protection in the wake of their amazing decision to step down from royal duties to forge a new career and a financially independent life in California in 2020.
Since then, the couple has relied on a private security team based in the US, but the couple’s legal representatives argue that the team does not have sufficient jurisdiction abroad or access to British intelligence information necessary to protect the Sussex family.
Harry has argued that he cannot guarantee the protection of Meghan and their two children Archie Harrison and Lilibet Diana without the Met Police because of their access to British intelligence.
But the Sussexes returned to the UK last month to celebrate the platinum anniversary celebrations of Harry’s beloved grandmother, the Queen.