Top related persons:
Top related locs:
Top related orgs:

Search resuls for: "Shaheed Fatima"


4 mentions found


LONDON (AP) — A lawyer for Prince Harry on Tuesday challenged the U.K. government’s decision to strip him of his security detail after he gave up his status as a working member of the royal family and moved to the United States. Harry, whose wife is biracial, cited what he said were racist attitudes and unbearable intrusions of the British media in his decision to leave the United Kingdom. Eadie also said there was a cost factor, because security funds aren’t unlimited. Harry said the committee unfairly nixed his security request without hearing from him personally and didn't disclose the panel’s composition, which he later learned included royal family staff. The case is one of five that Harry has pending in the High Court.
Persons: , Prince Harry, Duke, Sussex, Shaheed Fatima, , Fatima, , Harry wasn't, Harry, shouldn't, ” Harry, King Charles III, Meghan Markle, Diana, James Eadie, Eadie, Edward Young, Queen Elizabeth II Organizations: Royal, VIP, Kew, Court, Daily Mail, Mail, Daily, Sun Locations: United States, London, Britain, Paris, United Kingdom, Canada, California
By Michael HoldenLONDON (Reuters) - 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. Harry, along with other senior royals, had received full security protection provided by the state before he decided to step back from his royal duties and move to California with his American wife Meghan in 2020. Shaheed Fatima, the lawyer for Harry - who was not in court, said he had been subjected to unlawful and unfair treatment. She said the Executive Committee for the Protection of Royalty and Public Figures, known as RAVEC, had not followed its own policy or treated Harry as it treated other figures. In May, the High Court ruled against Harry after he challenged the government's refusal to let him pay for his own police protection.
Persons: Michael Holden LONDON, Prince Harry, Harry, Meghan, , King Charles, Shaheed Fatima, James Eadie, Peter Lane, Diana, Harry's, Michael Holden, Angus MacSwan Organizations: London's, Office Locations: British, Britain, California, Paris, New York
LONDON, Dec 5 (Reuters) - 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. Harry, along with other senior royals, had received full security protection provided by the state before he decided to step back from his royal duties and move to California with his American wife Meghan in 2020. Shaheed Fatima, the lawyer for Harry - who was not in court, said he had been subjected to unlawful and unfair treatment. She said the Executive Committee for the Protection of Royalty and Public Figures, known as RAVEC, had not followed its own policy or treated Harry as it treated other figures. In May, the High Court ruled against Harry after he challenged the government's refusal to let him pay for his own police protection.
Persons: Prince Harry, Harry, Meghan, , King Charles, Shaheed Fatima, James Eadie, Peter Lane, Diana, Harry's, Michael Holden, Angus MacSwan Organizations: London's, Office, Thomson Locations: British, Britain, California, Paris, New York
LONDON, May 16 (Reuters) - Prince Harry should not be allowed to pay for his own police protection while in Britain because wealthy individuals should not be able to buy specially trained officers as private bodyguards, lawyers for the British government told a court on Tuesday. Since moving to California, where they live with their two young children, they have relied on a private security team, but say those arrangements do not give the fifth-in-line to the throne the level of protection he needs while visiting Britain. Harry, who was briefly in Britain for his father King Charles' Coronation earlier this month, offered to pay for the protection himself, which authorities refused. Last year, Britain's former counter-terrorism police chief said there had been credible threats made against the couple by far-right extremists. A judge initially denied him permission for this in February and on Tuesday his lawyers sought to overturn that decision.
Total: 4