Another foreigner get a UK passport every five minutes

[Fairtrade]

Here is the latest news:

Every five minutes a foreigner is given a UK passport,


http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/a ... ge_id=1770

Wow and people complain about processing times!

[sakura]

Someone has to replace the 250,000 Brits emigrating from the UK each year!
- Altan Houssein, Henley, England

I lol'd at this. So true.

Hmm...does anyone know exactly whether (or not) the BIA were considering changing the rules for naturalisation for those with criminal convictions? To be honest, I had actually thought it odd that there was even consideration for people with (gross) criminal records to become BCs...

[global gypsy]

To be honest, I had actually thought it odd that there was even consideration for people with (gross) criminal records to become BCs...

My take on this is that a lot of countries deliberately allowed this, so that they could get shady characters in to do spying etc. for them later on. At the end of WWII, countries such as the US actually let in ex-Gestapo types so that they would train their own intelligence agencies.

[JAJ]

Hmm...does anyone know exactly whether (or not) the BIA were considering changing the rules for naturalisation for those with criminal convictions?

The rules are set down in policy and can be changed any time. Howeverthe Daily Mail don't seem to have it quite right:

"In Ibrahim's case, he had to wait only 30 months after being freed from a five-year jail sentence for a string of robberies."

That doesn't quite stack up with the naturalisation guide AN which suggests that a five year prison sentence imposes a 10 year bar on naturalisation (from date of conviction).
http://uk.sitestat.com/homeoffice/ind/s ... s_type=pdf

Of course there's a strong argument that there should be a longer time bar, especially for cases of repeat offenders.

It will be interesting to see whether this government (or a future one) revokes the British citizenship of those convicted for the 21 July attacks. It won't take much for Parliament to drop its current scruples about avoiding statelessness on deprivation.

[Christophe]

It will be interesting to see whether this government (or a future one) revokes the British citizenship of those convicted for the 21 July attacks. It won't take much for Parliament to drop its current scruples about avoiding statelessness on deprivation.

... although such a change wouldn't solve every problem that it would be intended to solve: if such a person were to become stateless, then there is likely to be no other country that would take the person or on which diplomatic pressure could be applied to take the person. Therefore, instead of being stuck with a British citizen offender, the UK would be stuck with a stateless offender. A point would be made, certainly, but there might not be much practical difference.

[JAJ]

... although such a change wouldn't solve every problem that it would be intended to solve: if such a person were to become stateless, then there is likely to be no other country that would take the person or on which diplomatic pressure could be applied to take the person. Therefore, instead of being stuck with a British citizen offender, the UK would be stuck with a stateless offender. A point would be made, certainly, but there might not be much practical difference.

There would be a significant practical difference in that such a "stateless offender" could be held in immigration detention, or alternatively, paroled into the community but subject to being returned to detention any time.

If the United Kingdom started refusing to accept the passports of certain countries (the ones that do not co-operate with return of their citizens) as valid travel documents for entry to the UK, then this problem would be greatly reduced in scope.

[Christophe]

There would be a significant practical difference in that such a "stateless offender" could be held in immigration detention, or alternatively, paroled into the community but subject to being returned to detention any time.

If the United Kingdom started refusing to accept the passports of certain countries (the ones that do not co-operate with return of their citizens) as valid travel documents for entry to the UK, then this problem would be greatly reduced in scope.

The first point is a good one, although the courts might yet invoke human rights on the question of indefinite detention, statelessness notwithstanding. That is a separate issue, and one that might need to be addressed in any case.

The second point is a good one too, but it wouldn't make any difference in the case of a stateless person (e.g. one who had lost his or her first citizenship on naturalising as a British citizen and whose British citizenship was then removed (now not possible, of course, though it would be in the scenario being painted)).