Prince Harry has returned to the Court of Appeal as he challenges a previous ruling regarding his security arrangements, claiming he and Meghan Markle stepped back from royal duties in 2020 because they felt “unprotected by the institution.”

Harry is appealing a decision made by High Court judge Sir Peter Lane, who last year rejected his case against the Home Office and the Executive Committee for the Protection of Royalty and Public Figures (Ravec). The Duke argues he was unfairly treated after his round-the-clock royal protection was removed following “Megxit.”

In the latest two-day hearing in London, Harry’s lawyer, Shaheed Fatima KC, said he was “singled out for different, unjustified and inferior treatment.” She stated in written submissions that on January 8, 2020, the Duke and Duchess felt “forced” to step down as working royals because they believed they weren’t being adequately protected, although they still wished to support the Queen privately.

Fatima argued that the process Ravec applied to Harry was “bespoke,” meaning it was created specifically for him and not used for anyone else in similar circumstances. However, Harry does not view “bespoke” as necessarily meaning “better.”

His legal team contends he should have been assessed using the same framework as any other individual under Ravec’s purview unless there was a compelling reason not to.

Court documents referenced recent security threats, including a call by Al-Qaeda for Harry to be killed, following Ravec’s 2020 decision to reduce his protection.

Another incident noted was a 2023 car chase involving Harry and Meghan in New York City, which police said showed “reckless disregard” by paparazzi but led to no charges.

Fatima claimed the lack of a formal risk assessment (RMB) by Ravec may have led to flawed conclusions, and that Harry still hasn’t been granted one, despite the recent threats.