header-logo header-logo

Court clarifies statelessness in Al-Jedda

14 October 2013
Issue: 7580 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

Home secretary acted unlawfully in stripping refugee of British citizenship

The Supreme Court has unanimously ruled that Home Secretary Theresa May acted unlawfully when she stripped a refugee of his citizenship, because she rendered him stateless.

Hilal Al-Jedda, an Iraqi who claimed asylum in the UK in 1992, was granted British citizenship in 2000, automatically losing his Iraqi citizenship.

In 2004, he travelled to Iraq with his family, where he was arrested and subsequently detained for three years by the British authorities, who believed he was involved in terrorism. Al-Jedda denied the allegations, and no criminal charges were ever brought.

The home secretary then revoked his British citizenship, and he travelled to Turkey. 

Under s 40(4) of the British Nationality Act 1981, a secretary of state may not make a deprivation of citizenship order where satisfied that an order would render a person stateless.

The home secretary argued that her order did not make Al-Jedda stateless because he could have applied for Iraqi citizenship.

Dismissing her appeal, in Home Secretary v Al-Jedda [2013] UKSC 62, Lord Wilson said a s 40(4) inquiry was a “straightforward exercise… it is whether the person holds another nationality at the date of the order”. 

Lord Wilson noted that Home Office guidance on statelessness, published this year, incorporated the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees’ guidance, which provides that “an individual’s nationality is to be assessed as at the time of determination of eligibility…it is neither a historic nor a predictive exercise”. 

Phil Shiner, solicitor at Public Interest Lawyers, who acted for Al-Quedda, says the ruling “clarifies the law relating to statelessness”.

In separate proceedings, the European Court of Human Rights held in 2011 that Al-Jedda’s internment in Iraq had breached his Art 5(1) right to liberty.

 

Issue: 7580 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Pillsbury—Lord Garnier KC

Pillsbury—Lord Garnier KC

Appointment of former Solicitor General bolsters corporate investigations and white collar practice

Hall & Wilcox—Nigel Clark

Hall & Wilcox—Nigel Clark

Firm strengthens international strategy with hire of global relations consultant

Slater Heelis—Sylviane Kokouendo & Shazia Ashraf

Slater Heelis—Sylviane Kokouendo & Shazia Ashraf

Partner and associate join employment practice

NEWS
The government’s plan to introduce a Single Professional Services Supervisor could erode vital legal-sector expertise, warns Mark Evans, president of the Law Society of England and Wales, in NLJ this week
Writing in NLJ this week, Jonathan Fisher KC of Red Lion Chambers argues that the ‘failure to prevent’ model of corporate criminal responsibility—covering bribery, tax evasion, and fraud—should be embraced, not resisted
Professor Graham Zellick KC argues in NLJ this week that, despite Buckingham Palace’s statement stripping Andrew Mountbatten Windsor of his styles, titles and honours, he remains legally a duke
Writing in NLJ this week, Sophie Ashcroft and Miranda Joseph of Stevens & Bolton dissect the Privy Council’s landmark ruling in Jardine Strategic Ltd v Oasis Investments II Master Fund Ltd (No 2), which abolishes the long-standing 'shareholder rule'
In NLJ this week, Sailesh Mehta and Theo Burges of Red Lion Chambers examine the government’s first-ever 'Afghan leak' super-injunction—used to block reporting of data exposing Afghans who aided UK forces and over 100 British officials. Unlike celebrity privacy cases, this injunction centred on national security. Its use, the authors argue, signals the rise of a vast new body of national security law spanning civil, criminal, and media domains
back-to-top-scroll