Latest news with #ShaheedFatima
Yahoo
11-05-2025
- Entertainment
- Yahoo
Prince Harry's Lawyer Claims His 'Life Is at Stake' When It Comes to Court Ruling
When you buy through links on our articles, Future and its syndication partners may earn a commission. Prince Harry's lawyers emphasized that his "life" could be at risk depending on the outcome of his latest court battle. On Wednesday, April 9, the Duke of Sussex attended the final day of hearings in the appeal over a U.K. court's decision to remove his taxpayer-funded security. The duke traveled to London to appear in court, although it's been reported by multiple outlets he did not meet with King Charles before the monarch left for a four-day tour of Italy. In 2020, Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's police protection in the UK. was stripped after they stepped down as senior working royals. The Duke of Sussex is challenging the ruling in his case in an appeal that has been years in the making. Earlier this week, his barrister Shaheed Fatima KC said the Duke and Duchess of Sussex "felt forced to step back from the role of full-time official working members of the Royal Family as they considered they were not being protected by the institution." On Wednesday, she stated, via the Mirror, "There is a person sitting behind me whose safety, whose security, and whose life is at stake. There is a person sitting behind me who is being told he is getting a special bespoke process when he knows and has experienced a process that is manifestly inferior in every respect." The Duke of Sussex was reported to have been given a special "bespoke" process for his security review, a proceeding which Fatima claims has been "inferior" and "unjustified." Prince Harry has remarked on several occasions—including in a documentary about tabloid journalism—that he felt unsafe bringing wife Meghan Markle and their children Princess Lilibet and Prince Archie to the U.K. "It's still dangerous, and all it takes is one lone actor, one person who reads this stuff to act on what they have read," Harry said in 2024's Tabloids on Trial. "And whether it's a knife or acid, whatever it is, and these are things that are of genuine concern for me, it's one of the reasons why I won't bring my wife back to this country." His lawyer pointed out that the mere fact Prince Harry attended the two-day hearing in person was a testament to how important the matter was to the duke. "We do say that his presence here, and throughout this appeal, is a potent illustration, were one needed, of how much this appeal means to him and his family," she told the court. According to the Mirror, judge Sir Geoffrey Vos said a decision on the appeal was "unlikely" to arrive before Easter.
Chicago Tribune
08-04-2025
- Politics
- Chicago Tribune
Lawyer says Prince Harry was unfairly treated when stripped of UK security detail
LONDON — Prince Harry was treated unfairly when he was stripped of his British security detail, his attorney told appeals court judges Tuesday. Harry, whose rare appearance in court indicated the case's importance to him, lost his government-funded protection in February 2020 after he stepped down from his role as a working member of the royal family and moved to the U.S. A High Court judge ruled last year that a government panel's decision to provide 'bespoke' security for the Duke of Sussex on an as-needed basis was not unlawful, irrational or unjustified. But attorney Shaheed Fatima argued that a group that evaluated Harry's security needs failed to follow its own process and perform a risk management assessment. 'The appellant does not accept that bespoke means better,' Fatima said. 'In fact, in his submission, it means that he has been singled out for different, unjustified and inferior treatment.' A lawyer for the government said Harry's argument in the lower court was accurately found to have been based on an 'inappropriate, formalist interpretation' of the government's security review that was misconceived. 'The appeal is fairly to be characterized in the same way,' attorney James Eadie said. 'It involves a continued failure to see the wood for the trees, advancing propositions available only by reading small parts of the evidence, and now the judgment, out of context and ignoring the totality of the picture.' The hearing before three Court of Appeal justices is due to end Wednesday and a written decision is expected later. While the hearing was livestreamed, some was to be conducted behind closed doors to discuss sensitive security details. Harry arrived at court with a small security detail supplemented with court officers. He waved to cameras before disappearing into a private entrance. Harry, 40, the younger son of King Charles III, has bucked royal family convention by taking the government and tabloid press to court, where he has a mixed record. But Harry rarely shows up to court hearings, making only a few appearances in the past two years. That included the trial of one of his phone hacking cases against the British tabloids when he was the first senior member of the royal family to enter the witness box in more than a century. Harry claimed he and his family are endangered when visiting his homeland because of hostility aimed at him and his wife Meghan, Duchess of Sussex, on social media and through relentless hounding by news media. After being denied government-sponsored protection, Harry faced at least two serious security threats, his lawyer said in court papers. Al-Qaida had published a document that said Harry's assassination would please Muslims, and he and his wife were involved in a dangerous pursuit by paparazzi in New York. He lost a related court case in which he sought permission to privately pay for a police detail when in the U.K. but a judge denied that offer after a government lawyer argued officers shouldn't be used as 'private bodyguards for the wealthy.' Harry also dropped a libel case against the publisher of the Daily Mail for an article that said he had tried to hide his efforts to continue receiving government-funded security. But he won a significant victory at trial in 2023 against the publisher of the Daily Mirror when a judge found that phone hacking at the tabloid was 'widespread and habitual.' He claimed a 'monumental' victory in January when Rupert Murdoch's U.K. tabloids made an unprecedented apology for intruding in his life for years, and agreed to pay substantial damages to settle his privacy invasion lawsuit. He has a similar case pending against the publisher of the Mail.
CBC
08-04-2025
- Politics
- CBC
Harry 'singled out' for 'inferior treatment,' says lawyer at appeal over prince's security detail
Prince Harry was treated unfairly when he was stripped of his British security detail, his lawyer told appeal court judges in London on Tuesday. Harry, who made a rare appearance in court for the hearing, lost his government-funded protection in February 2020 after he stepped down from his role as a working member of the Royal Family and moved to the U.S. A High Court judge ruled last year that a government panel's decision to provide "bespoke" security for Harry — custom-designed on an as-needed basis for his visits to the U.K. — was not unlawful, irrational or unjustified. But lawyer Shaheed Fatima argued that a group that evaluated the Duke of Sussex's security needs failed to follow its own process and perform a risk management assessment. "The appellant does not accept that bespoke means better," Fatima said. "In fact, in his submission, it means that he has been singled out for different, unjustified and inferior treatment." Harry, whose titles include the Duke of Sussex, was wearing a navy blue suit and light blue tie as he sat behind his lawyer. His surprise appearance was an indication of the case's importance to him. Harry, 40, the younger son of King Charles, has bucked Royal Family convention by taking the government and tabloid press to court, where he has a mixed record. But Harry rarely shows up to court, making only a few appearances in the past two years. That included the trial of one of his phone hacking cases against the British tabloids when he was the first senior member of the royal family to enter the witness box in more than a century. Claims that Harry and family are endangered Harry had claimed he and his family are endangered when visiting his homeland because of hostility aimed at him and his wife Meghan, Duchess of Sussex, on social media and through relentless hounding by news media. He lost a related court case in which he sought permission to privately pay for a police detail when in the U.K., but a judge denied that offer after a government lawyer argued officers shouldn't be used as "private bodyguards for the wealthy." He also dropped a libel case against the publisher of the Daily Mail for an article that said he had tried to hide his efforts to continue receiving government-funded security. But he won a significant victory at trial in 2023 against the publisher of the Daily Mirror when a judge found that phone hacking at the tabloid was "widespread and habitual." WATCH | Harry wins case against Daily Mirror owner (2023): Prince Harry wins phone-hacking lawsuit against Mirror tabloid chain 1 year ago Duration 2:07 Prince Harry is declaring victory after a London judge says he was a victim of phone hacking by the British publisher Mirror Group Newspapers. He claimed a "monumental" victory in January when Rupert Murdoch's U.K. tabloids made an unprecedented apology for intruding in his life for years and agreed to pay substantial damages to settle his privacy-invasion lawsuit. He has a similar case pending against the publisher of the Daily Mail.
