European Court rules Theresa May's policy of stripping terror suspects of British citizenship is lawful

Judges at court in Strasbourg unanimously reject Sudanese national’s claim

Ashley Cowburn
Political Correspondent
Thursday 09 March 2017 12:30
Comments
The policy was extended by the then Home Secretary in 2014
The policy was extended by the then Home Secretary in 2014

A policy of depriving terror suspects of their British citizenship ramped up while Theresa May was Home Secretary has been upheld during a case heard at the European Court of Human Rights.

The judgment at the court in Strasbourg unanimously rejected a claim from a man who was barred from returning to Britain after he was stripped of his UK citizenship. The Sudanese national was suspected of taking part in terrorism-related activities to the extremist group al Shabaab.

The man – referred to as “K2” in the decision – brought a case against the measures after the Home Office repealed his British citizenship in 2010. He was born in Sudan in 1982 and arrived in Britain as a child before becoming naturalised in 2000.

The man’s complaint at the ECHR centred on Article 8 – the right to family life – of the European Convention on Human Rights.

But in its decision, the court said it accepted an “arbitrary” denial of citizenship may, in certain circumstances, raise an issue under Article 8. But it found no such issue arose in this case, and concluded the claim that deprivation of citizenship breached Article 8 was “manifestly ill-founded”.

Judges also concluded the decision to exclude the man from the UK was not disproportionate with the legitimate aim of protecting the public from the threat of terrorism.

During the coalition years Ms May ramped up the act of depriving individuals of their citizenship on terrorism related grounds. According to the Bureau of Investigative Journalism figures published last year showed the then Home Secretary had used the powers in relation to 33 people.

Critics of the programme have previously warned that it allows ministers to “wash their hands” of national suspected of terrorism offences who could be subject to torture and illegal detention abroad. The judgement is also likely to act a precedent and encourage Home Office officials to continue using the provisions.

The judges at the ECHR, however, said, in this particular case, the then Home Secretary acted “swiftly and diligently, and in accordance with the law”.

Those affected have their passports cancelled, and lose their right to enter the UK – making it very difficult to appeal against the Home Secretary’s decision.

Responding to the judgement, a Home Office spokesperson told The Independent: “This Government puts the safety of our families, communities and country first and we welcome the court’s judgement.”

“Citizenship is a privilege not a right and it is right that the Home Secretary can deprive an individual of their citizenship where it is believed it is conducive to the public good to do so,” they added.

Register for free to continue reading

Registration is a free and easy way to support our truly independent journalism

By registering, you will also enjoy limited access to Premium articles, exclusive newsletters, commenting, and virtual events with our leading journalists

Please enter a valid email
Please enter a valid email
Must be at least 6 characters, include an upper and lower case character and a number
Must be at least 6 characters, include an upper and lower case character and a number
Must be at least 6 characters, include an upper and lower case character and a number
Please enter your first name
Special characters aren’t allowed
Please enter a name between 1 and 40 characters
Please enter your last name
Special characters aren’t allowed
Please enter a name between 1 and 40 characters
You must be over 18 years old to register
You must be over 18 years old to register
Opt-out-policy
You can opt-out at any time by signing in to your account to manage your preferences. Each email has a link to unsubscribe.

By clicking ‘Create my account’ you confirm that your data has been entered correctly and you have read and agree to our Terms of use, Cookie policy and Privacy notice.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy policy and Terms of service apply.

Already have an account? sign in

By clicking ‘Register’ you confirm that your data has been entered correctly and you have read and agree to our Terms of use, Cookie policy and Privacy notice.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy policy and Terms of service apply.

Register for free to continue reading

Registration is a free and easy way to support our truly independent journalism

By registering, you will also enjoy limited access to Premium articles, exclusive newsletters, commenting, and virtual events with our leading journalists

Already have an account? sign in

By clicking ‘Register’ you confirm that your data has been entered correctly and you have read and agree to our Terms of use, Cookie policy and Privacy notice.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy policy and Terms of service apply.

Join our new commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in