Lord Hanson, Minister of State for the Home Office, says updated good character policy is compliant with the Refugee Convention
Following an urgent private notice question in the House of Lords today, the Government defended a recent change to Home Office guidance, which adopts a default position of denying British citizenship applications from those who arrive in the UK via unauthorised routes.
Image credit: WikipediaHome Office guidance on Nationality: good character requirement was updated on Monday to clarify that citizenship applications that include illegal entry will normally be refused, regardless of when the illegal entry occurred.
The guidance states: "Any person applying for citizenship from 10 February 2025, who previously entered the UK illegally will normally be refused, regardless of the time that has passed since the illegal entry took place. […] A person who applies for citizenship from 10 February 2025 who has previously arrived without a required valid entry clearance or electronic travel authorisation, having made a dangerous journey will normally be refused citizenship. A dangerous journey includes, but is not limited to, travelling by small boat or concealed in a vehicle or other conveyance. It does not include, for example, arrival as a passenger with a commercial airline."
After being picked up and reported by Free Movement, the change gained widespread media attention and drew widespread criticism. The Refugee Council said the change "flies in the face of reason," and it made no sense for the Government to erect more barriers to prevent refugees from integrating into the UK.
Defending the change, Lord Hanson of Flint, Minister of State at the Home Office, told the House of Lords today: "My Lords, we have strengthened measures to ensure that anyone who entered the UK illegally faces having British citizenship refused. We take our international obligations very seriously, and the good character policy is compliant with those obligations. The Government will continue to consider positive factors, such as the contribution a person has made to society, as well as negative factors, such as breaches of immigration law. The policy provides for applications to be granted where mitigating circumstances mean it would be appropriate to do so."
Lord Hanson was responding to an urgent question from former Labour Home Secretary Baron Blunkett. While Blunkett expressed full support for the Government's efforts to tackle people smuggling gangs, he criticised the policy change, arguing that such a significant decision should be subject to parliamentary scrutiny. This point was later echoed by Lord Tyrie, who said it was becoming increasingly clear that this was a major change that deserves much more substantial consideration and scrutiny by both Houses of Parliament.
Baroness Hamwee noted that the change would impact refugees and asked Lord Hanson how would refugees feel to find themselves now bracketed with criminals and terrorists when applying for citizenship.
Lord Hanson emphasised in reply that nothing in the guidance would prevent an individual from applying for citizenship, but the basic test is that a person who entered the UK illegally will be presumed to have their citizenship application refused unless they can bring forward specific, mitigating circumstances. He said the aim was to reduce illegal migration and ensure people enter the UK legally.
When pressed further by Lord Dubs on the purpose of the change, Lord Hanson said it was one of the Government's 'red lines' on immigration that British citizenship is a privilege, not a right, and it should not be available to those who entered the UK through an illegal route.
Lord Hanson later confirmed that the Government believes the updated guidance is compliant with the Refugee Convention. "Nothing in the proposals today stops any individual applying for British citizenship, however they have arrived in the United Kingdom," he told Baron Boateng. Lord Hanson clarified that individuals who enter the UK illegally will find their application turned down, unless they can provide a range of circumstances which are "exceptional, compelling and mitigating," and where the Home Secretary may therefore choose to apply discretion to grant citizenship on an exceptional basis.
Garden Court's Colin Yeo said on Blueksy yesterday that the policy is "a clear breach of the Refugee Convention" and it will have zero deterrent effect. "I’m wary of making claims for international law but I struggle to see how this could not be a breach of the Refugee Convention. […] Denial of citizenship for reason of illegal entry is penalisation," Yeo explained further on Substack.
Refugee Action called the change "appalling and cruel" and urged the Government to reverse it. "It ignores reality - there are no safe routes for most people who need protection," the charity added.
Ian Dunt, political journalist and author, called it Labour's "single most unconscionable policy" since entering power. In an article for the i Paper, Dunt wrote: "The policy is almost certainly illegal. Labour managed to sneak it out as guidance to caseworkers. This means that it is not primary or even secondary legislation – an important distinction which keeps it away from the attorney general’s desk. But no matter how they introduced it, it undermines our commitments in international law. […] The policy is a rejection of the concept of equality. It is a rejection of the concept of dignity. It is an affront to any of the values which this Government was supposed to hold: decency, fairness, the rule of law."
It should be noted that the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) issued important guidelines in September 2024 clarifying how Article 31 of the Refugee Convention prohibits states from imposing penalties on refugees on account of irregular entry or presence. UNHCR clarifies that the term "penalties" should be interpreted broadly to include any criminal or administrative measures that are punitive, discriminatory, retributive or deterrent in character.
"A penalty is prohibited under Article 31(1) when it is imposed on the refugee because of their irregular entry or presence, or the means and related actions whereby irregular entry or presence has occurred," the UNHCR guidance explains.