Prince Harry’s security lawsuit has publicized his vulnerabilities, potentially putting himself at greater risk.

Chief royal correspondent Jack Royston said on a new episode of Regalrumination.com’s The Royal Report podcast that in pleading his case to the court, Harry was also advertising to “potential terrorists and assassins that he is a high-value target.”

The prince this month with a court order granting him permission to appeal a judgment handed down in Britain in February, which for a judicial review of the government decision to remove his state-funded bodyguards when he in 2020.

A judge previously ruled that the subsidiary group of the government’s Home Office, the Executive Committee for the Protection of Royalty and Public Figures (RAVEC), acted legally when it decided to downgrade the prince’s security arrangements.

No longer a working royal, the committee removed Harry’s round-the-clock Metropolitan Police bodyguards and replaced them with a bespoke arrangement. The prince’s security needs when visiting Britain would be assessed on a case-by-case basis and approved beforehand.

Harry’s legal team has argued that RAVEC did not act in accordance with its own due process when making its decision. They also said that the prince taking his family to Britain under the current system.

Though Harry has been granted permission to take his case to the Court of Appeal, the presiding judge has warned that he may . With this in mind, Royston told Royal Report listeners that the prince may have to consider how he can protect himself moving forward.

“For me, the tragedy of it is partly that Harry’s kind of making his situation worse, in my opinion,” Royston said.

“He’s basically advertising the fact he doesn’t have police protection…Would-be-terrorists would not necessarily know that.”

“He does sometimes have police protection,” Royston said. “Because of the fierce debate around it, we know that he has been offered a police team when attending royal events for which he has an invite from the palace and not generally otherwise. So, without this whole [legal] battle, I wouldn’t know that that was the distinction drawn, and therefore terrorists would not necessarily know it either.

“They would likely assume that his private security team were, in fact, armed police officers. So, the deterrent aspect of it would have remained, and that deterrent aspect has been damaged by this case.”

Regalrumination.com reached out to representatives of via email for comment.

Royston added that Harry is furthering the risk associated with his safety and security arrangements as they currently stand.

“In a small way, I think he’s actually putting himself more at risk and also putting it on people’s minds that he’s a high-value target,” he said. “He’s kind of selling it to the court, but then also to the potential terrorists and assassins that he is a high-value target to terrorists.

“It’s kind of the power of suggestion. And even if he wins the case, the Home Office could just take the same decision again, using a different method. Winning a judicial review case of this kind doesn’t mean that you get the outcome you want. It just means that you can force the decision to be taken again in a different way.”

On how the prince should move forward, Royston said that he should “come to terms with the fact that he doesn’t have this police team anymore and then reassess his relationship with Britain.”

“I think personally that he should choose to reassess the risk to himself and consider it to be less serious than he is suggesting in this case because he’s not obliged to put himself in harm’s way,” he said.

“He’s not obliged to go to places where his presence is going to be advertised in advance, so he’s not obliged to give people an opportunity to target him and to attack him in the way that working royals are.”

No timeline for Harry’s appeal has yet been published. In the court order granting the appeal, the judge denied a request from the prince’s legal team to expedite the proceedings to have them concluded by the end of July.