Prince Harry Attends Day Two of U.K. Security Appeal Following His Lawyer's Claim He Received 'Unjustified Treatment'

• Prince Harry has arrived at court in central London for the second day of his appeal over the decision to deny him automatic security when he is in the U.K.

• On day one, the Duke of Sussex's lawyer claimed that he was "singled out" for "inferior treatment" after the U.K. government's security committee imposed a "bespoke" arrangement on him

• Harry's long-running legal battle has contributed to ongoing tensions with his father, King Charles

Prince Harry returned to court on Tuesday, April 9, for the second day of his legal fight over police protection in the U.K.

The Duke of Sussex, 40, is appealing the government's 2020 decision to strip him of automatic security after he and Meghan Markle stepped back from royal duties . In opening arguments on Monday, his legal team argued he had been "singled out" for "unjustified and inferior treatment."

Harry arrived at London's Royal Courts of Justice around 10 a.m. local time, greeting onlookers, photographers, and TV crews with a wave before entering through a side entrance. The hearing is taking place in Court 73 and is expected to conclude its public portion on April 9, with much of the day's proceedings held behind closed doors.

Barrister Shaheed Fatima KC, representing Harry, hinted that the private session would explore sensitive comparisons between the duke and others — potentially members of the royal family or other high-profile individuals. "The closed session deals with [Harry's] comparison with others," she noted during Monday's hearing.

This high-stakes legal battle has added further strain to Harry's already fractured relationship with his father, King Charles. Key aides to the monarch sit on RAVEC, the government committee responsible for decisions around taxpayer-funded security.

Related: The Real Reason Why Prince Harry Missed His Friend's Wedding Despite His Visit Back to the U.K.

Prince Harry arrived at Court 73 around 10:28 a.m., just before the judges entered. He was accompanied by his lawyer, Jenny Afia, and two members of his security team.

Inside the courtroom, Harry was seen taking notes in a small spiral-bound notebook and occasionally sending messages on his phone.

Much of the argument on Wednesday centered on the fact that no formal risk assessment (RMB) was done when Harry lost automatic security in 2020. Instead, the government's RAVEC committee gave him a case-by-case arrangement based on current needs.

Representing the Home Secretary, Sir James Eadie KC denied Harry was "singled out," saying the flexible setup had "positive advantages" and reflected Harry's decision to step back from royal duties and live abroad. He argued that the bespoke approach was carefully considered and appropriate for Harry's unique circumstances.

Sir James added that RAVEC's chairman at the time, Sir Richard Mottram, had final responsibility for the decision, and that RAVEC had the expertise to act without a formal risk report in this case.

The court later moved into a private session expected to last several hours.

In their written arguments, the Duke of Sussex's lawyers laid out some of the background, saying Harry and his wife Meghan, 43, "felt forced to step back from their roles as full time offical working members of the Royal Family as they considered they were not being protected by the institution."

The lawyers outlined how Harry and Meghan had "wished to continue their duties in support of the late Queen [Elizabeth] as privately funded members of the Royal Family."

In the early submissions on April 8, Harry's leading lawyer claimed RAVEC did not carry out expert assessments of any threat to the prince.

Related: Prince Harry Arrived in the U.K. Ahead of King Charles' Italy Trip. Did They Reunite?

RAVEC, she says, did not use the specialist body, the Risk Management Board (RMB), to undertake a new report on the security risk faced by Harry as part of its deliberations. She said, therefore, that RAVEC "diverted" from its terms of reference in that. The RMB assessment, Fatima added, "is a key and crucial feature" of RAVEC process.

Fatima reiterated RAVEC did not have "the expert analysis" that it needed in order to consider whether or not Prince Harry should be treated in the same way to those in what she called "the Other VIP Category" — she argued that Harry's position is "analogous" to those in that category.

The RAVEC committee, she pointed out, came up with a unique arrangement for Harry and added that his "bespoke" arrangement is "not applied for anyone else."

Can't get enough of PEOPLE's Royals coverage?  Sign up for our free Royals newsletter  to get the latest updates on Kate Middleton, Meghan Markle and more! 

Harry, she said, "does not accept that bespoke means better." And she added, "In his submission he has been singled out for different, unjustified and inferior treatment. Not only does this 'bespoke' process not involve an RMB — it also involves RAVEC considering the reason why [Harry] is attending a particular event: even though that is plainly irrelevant to the question of security."

Representing the Home Secretary, Sir James Eadie KC denied Harry was "singled out," saying the flexible setup had "positive advantages" and reflected Harry's decision to step back from royal duties and live abroad. He argued that the bespoke approach was carefully considered and appropriate for Harry's unique circumstances.

Sir James added that RAVEC's chairman at the time, Sir Richard Mottram, had final responsibility for the decision, and that RAVEC had the expertise to act without a formal risk report in this case.

The court later moved into a private session expected to last several hours.

Read the original article on People