The Duke of Sussex requested police protection after al-Qaeda murder threats when his automatic right to taxpayer-funded security was removed, a court hearing was told behind closed doors.
Harry’s lawyer told part of a Court of Appeal hearing held in public last week that the duke’s life was “at stake” after the refusal by the royal security committee to guarantee police protection during visits to the UK.
He travelled from California to attend the two-day challenge of the home secretary — several hours of which were held in-camera during evidence on security matters.
Al-Qaeda called for Harry, who served with the British Army in Afghanistan, “to be murdered” and his security team was told that the group had published a document saying that his “assassination would please the Muslim community”, the court was told.
Harry, or Captain Wales, as he was known in the army, at Camp Bastion in Afghanistan in 2012
JOHN STILLWELL/AP
A summary of the private portion of the hearing, released on Thursday, stated: “[Harry] confirmed that he had requested certain protection after a threat was made against him by al-Qaeda.”
• Prince Harry: I’m exhausted by court fight over security
The duke’s lawyers also claimed there was “no good reason” for the royal and VIP executive committee (Ravec) to depart from its normal process by not asking its “risk management board” of experts to carry out a security assessment.
A security risk analysis in April 2019 led to Harry receiving the recommended “protective security” until early 2020, when he stopped being a full-time working member of the royal family and moved abroad.
He sought to pay for that protective security himself but was not allowed to do so, the court was told.
Harry said the decision by Sir Richard Mottram, then chairman of Ravec, not to order a security analysis was “not logical” and inconsistent with the position of others in the category of “Other VIP”.
• Prince Harry tells court he was singled out for inferior treatment
The duke, 40, said after the confidential part of the hearing: “People would be shocked by what’s being held back … worst fears have been confirmed by the whole legal disclosure in this case and that’s really sad.”
He claimed the lack of the automatic police protection meant he did not feel safe bringing his wife, Meghan, 43, and children, Prince Archie, five, and Princess Lilibet, three, to the UK.
Harry and Meghan at an awards ceremony in Hollywood last year
KEVIN MAZUR/GETTY IMAGES
• Prince Harry and King Charles: will the royal family rift ever heal?
The note shows that Sir James Eadie KC, representing the home secretary, said the procedure now used to consider the duke’s security needs was “better suited to [Harry’s] circumstances than other processes which [he] says ought to be adopted”.
A ruling on the appeal is expected within weeks. The losing party faces a legal bill of £1.5 million.