April 9 (UPI) — Prince Harry was back in a London court Wednesday for the second day of his two-day security appeal hearing against the British government.

On Tuesday during the first day of the appeal, Harry’s lawyer argued that the prince was subject to a “bespoke process” which allegedly saw him “singled-out for different, unjustified and inferior treatment.”

Harry’s security when in Britain is currently decided on a case-by-case basis as with any other high-profile visitors.

Sir James Eadie the prince’s lawyer, said Wednesday in the partially closed hearing that the Royal and VIP Executive Committee, otherwise known as Ravec which is the agency that oversees the level of security, was governed by “royal prerogative”

Britain’s Home Office is opposing the appeal on the government’s behalf.

Last year in February, the youngest son of King Charles III lost a challenge in Britain’s High Court claiming that a downgrade to his security status was unlawful, which the court said was a “legally sound” act.

“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,” Harry’s other attorney, Shaheed Fatima, told the court.

Meanwhile, the Duke of Sussex reportedly arrived Sunday to his native country just hours before the king and Queen Camilla left for a state visit to Italy.

Harry, 40, stepped down as a full-time member of the royal family and had his security downgraded in February 2020 when he moved to the United States with his wife, actress Meghan Markle, 43.

His legal team says that decision was in a “category of its own” and Ravec was correct to consider this case on its merit.

For security reasons, the details of his own security apparatus and the degree to which he would like to see it expanded have not been discussed publicly or in court as more sensitive information was discussed Wednesday.

The primary objective of Ravec, Eadie continued, was “to make nuanced judgments about security protection bringing all of their expertise to bear including making decisions about unusual cases and what process should most appropriately be followed.”

His legal team contended that Ravec had “terms of reference” for deciding security practices and there was “nothing to suggest they were designed to operate rigidly and not flexibly.”

It’s one of no less than six lawsuits involving the former working royal.

“If you’re members of the press, then you’re the reason he’s not in England,” a woman in the court room shouted at the media after Wednesday’s hearing.

A written decision by the three-judge panel, meanwhile, will be issued at a later date.