Prince Harry, 37, is suing over a decision not to allow him to pay for police protection for himself and his family while in the UK. The Duke wants to bring his children to visit from the US, but his barrister told the High Court on Friday that he “does not feel safe” when visiting under the current security arrangements. He is arguing that his private protection team in the US does not have adequate jurisdiction abroad or access to UK intelligence information which is needed to keep his family safe. But royal expert Angela Levin hit back at his claims.
Speaking to LBC, she said: “What annoyed me incredibly is he said he was in the immediate line of succession.
“Does he really think he’s got a chance to be king when he’s behaved like this?
“The Queen’s got to stand up to it.
“I think she’s got to stop him being the Counsellor of State and that means when she can’t manage or unwell, they become stand-ins.
“They go to meetings and they sign documents.”
READ MORE: ‘Something Andrew will want hidden!’ GB News guest in staggering claim
On Friday, the first hearing in the case took place at the Royal Courts of Justice in London, which Harry did not attend.
At the preliminary hearing, the court heard there was an application by both sides for some parts of the court documents in the case to be kept private.
Introducing the case, Shaheed Fatima QC, for the duke, said: “This claim is about the fact that the claimant does not feel safe when he is in the UK given the security arrangements applied to him in June 2021 and will continue to be applied to him.”
She continued: “It goes without saying that he does want to come back to see family and friends and to continue to support the charities that are so close to his heart.
Harry is challenging the February 2020 decision of the Executive Committee for the Protection of Royalty and Public Figures (Ravec) over his security.
A legal representative for Harry previously said the duke wants to fund the security himself, rather than ask taxpayers to foot the bill.
However Robert Palmer QC, for the Home Office, told the court the duke’s offer of private funding was “irrelevant”.
In written submissions, he said: “Personal protective security by the police is not available on a privately financed basis, and Ravec does not make decisions on the provision of such security on the basis that any financial contribution could be sought or obtained to pay for it.”