The UK High Court has quashed a decision taken by the Home Secretary refusing British citizenship to the wife and children of an Islamist extremist. The applicants’ citizenship applications were refused so as to deter other potential extremists, however this was held to be unlawful by Mr Justice Ouseley as the UK parliament had not expressly provided that British citizenship could be refused to deter others from engaging in extremism in the future. In challenging the decision, the applicants emphasised their connections to Britain and suitability to be granted citizenship. The applicants lived in Britain since 1994 and were granted indefinite leave to remain there in May 2009. The applicants’ father is a refused asylum seeker associated with Egyptian Islamic Jihad, who cannot be deported to his native Egypt for fear of torture there. The Home Office did not hold any “lurking doubts” that any of the applicants may be involved in extremist activities, and the Court accepted that they could all truthfully take the citizenship oath and pledge of allegiance in good faith.
Despite this the applicants were refused British citizenship in August 2014 so as “to deter potential extremists from involvement in extremist activities” and to make clear to potential extremists “that any extremist activity could affect the immigration and nationality status of close [family] members”. Mr Justice Ouseley stated that there was “real unfairness” underlying this rationale, by refusing naturalisation to an otherwise qualified candidate so as to deter others over whom the applicants had no control. The judge also highlighted the overreach of the Home Secretary in taking this unprecedented decision, stating that had parliament ever intended for her to be able to use such a discretionary power it would have expressly provided for it.
Click here to read the full judgment.