naturalisation question

[sally1]

for personal reasons i would like to apply for naturalisation based on my 5 years residence rather than marriage.

Is this a problem, in that would the HO question why i did not use the 3 yr marriage route?

[ppron747]

No - I can't see why it could be a problem

[trf0412]

Obviously I don't know what your reasons are for wanting to apply based on residence as opposed to marriage, but it made me wonder, is there actually any physical difference on the Certificate of Naturalisation?

My wife will soon be applying for naturalisation. The way I understood it is that if you apply on the basis of marriage the only difference is you can apply 2 years earlier than everyone else and you have to show them a marriage certificate. Apart from that, I thought everything else was identical.

However, if you know of other differences, please let me know.

[John]

The Section number of the relevant Act of Parliament is quoted on the Certificate, so that would be very slightly different. Apart from that, no difference at all.

[ppron747]

The only difference that would show on the certificate would be that the section of the British Nationality Act under which the application was granted would differ - Section 6(1) for people applying "under their own steam", and Section 6(2) for people married to a British citizen.

But both are British citizens otherwise than by descent, so there's no difference in the effect of the naturalisation.

One difference between the requirements for married to BC /not married to BC provisions is that the spouses of BCs aren't required to intend to continue to live in UK. Non-spouses are required to have such an intention.

[trf0412]

The Section number of the relevant Act of Parliament is quoted on the Certificate, so that would be very slightly different. Apart from that, no difference at all.

In which case, why would Sally1 want to apply based on residence as opposed to marriage?

One difference between the requirements for married to BC /not married to BC provisions is that the spouses of BCs aren't required to intend to continue to live in UK. Non-spouses are required to have such an intention.

Given what ppron747 says, I see it as an advantage to apply on the basis of marriage, since you have the freedom, if you choose, to emigrate. Having said that, although the requirement for someone not married to a BC is to have the intention to continue to live in the UK, how is that enforced? Is it possible for someone to lose there British Citizenship if they decided later in life to emigrate to Australia for example?

Also, is there a requirement for those who are married to a BC and applying on the basis of this to have the intention to remain married? And if not, shouldn't this be a requirement? I imagine this would be impossible to implement, but I'm wondering if that is one reason why Sally1 prefers to apply on the basis of residence.

[JAJ]

Having said that, although the requirement for someone not married to a BC is to have the intention to continue to live in the UK, how is that enforced?

Only by expecting to see that the person is living in the UK (as well as meeting the physical presence requirements) and remaining resident right up to being sworn in.

Intentions can and do change later.

There is an exception for people who intend to live overseas working for the UK government or a UK corporation or association (eg intending expatriates, provided the contract is structured correctly).

Is it possible for someone to lose there British Citizenship if they decided later in life to emigrate to Australia for example?

No it's not.

Also, is there a requirement for those who are married to a BC and applying on the basis of this to have the intention to remain married?

No.

And if not, shouldn't this be a requirement?

Parliament didn't think so when they made the rules back in 1981.

[Christophe]

Given what ppron747 says, I see it as an advantage to apply on the basis of marriage, since you have the freedom, if you choose, to emigrate. Having said that, although the requirement for someone not married to a BC is to have the intention to continue to live in the UK, how is that enforced? Is it possible for someone to lose there British Citizenship if they decided later in life to emigrate to Australia for example?

Also, is there a requirement for those who are married to a BC and applying on the basis of this to have the intention to remain married? And if not, shouldn't this be a requirement? I imagine this would be impossible to implement, but I'm wondering if that is one reason why Sally1 prefers to apply on the basis of residence.

The requirement (for people not applying on the basis of marriage to a British citizen) is that the person intends to continue live in the UK. There are two points here - an intention to do something doesn't necessarily mean that it will happen: circumstances might change, for example. The other point (admittedly related to the first point) is that this has to be the intention on the date the form is signed: it is perfectly possible to change one's mind afterwards and not be in contravention of that requirement.

This requirement is, of course, difficult to enforce because it is not usually easy to prove someone's intentions, and I have never heard of it being enforced. However, there could be situations in which a person's plans were apparent and did not accord with this requirement. For example, a person who had recently made arrangements to take a job in another country or who had recently sold his or her accommodation in the UK and used the proceeds to buy property elsewhere with a view to moving in to that property could probably be said to have demonstrated an intention not to remain living in the UK. As I say, though, I have never heard of this being investigated.

There is no requirement, as far as I know, for a person applying on the basis of marriage to a British citizen to intend to stay married to that person, but others might correct me on that.

[ppron747]

I don't want to drag this out unduly; we've already had lengthy - and largely sterile - discussions of the "future intentions" requirement. It is true that there's no enforcement of it, after the event.

But if, while they're considering an application, IND get wind of a 6(1) applicant's intention to move overseas for more than a few months, they will almost certainly refuse it. I am aware of a case where this happened.

I don't know whether it is because I suffered a Jesuit education (don't worry, I'm recovering ) , but my own view is that it's really an issue of personal integrity - I just don't think it is right for someone to make a declaration that they intend to continue to live in UK when they've already bought the ticket for emigration to the other side of the world.

Here endeth the first lesson....

[Christophe]

I don't know whether it is because I suffered a Jesuit education (don't worry, I'm recovering ) , but my own view is that it's really an issue of personal integrity - I just don't think it is right for someone to make a declaration that they intend to continue to live in UK when they've already bought the ticket for emigration to the other side of the world.

I don't think you need to have had a Jesuit education to think that - there is no doubt that it is dishonest to sign a form saying that that is your intention if it patently isn't.

I suppose my point was really that it doesn't follow from all of this that a naturalised British citizen (naturalised not on the basis of marriage to a British citizen) can never move abroad in the future - some countries have had these sort of restrictions in the past (e.g. can't live abroad for more than x years without losing citizenship) and some may still do so, but it is not the situation in British law.

(And you could do worse than a Jesuit education anyway!)

[trf0412]

I just don't think it is right for someone to make a declaration that they intend to continue to live in UK when they've already bought the ticket for emigration to the other side of the world.

ppron747 - I agree entirely. And anyway, as my wife will be appyling on the basis of marriage, it makes no difference to us what our future intentions are.

I guess the reasons I started to ask these questions if because I was curious as to what Sally1's personal reasons must be for not wanting to apply on the basis of marriage, if she is married to a BC, as it seems there is basically no difference between whichever route is chosen.

[Dawie]

I suppose my point was really that it doesn't follow from all of this that a naturalised British citizen (naturalised not on the basis of marriage to a British citizen) can never move abroad in the future - some countries have had these sort of restrictions in the past (e.g. can't live abroad for more than x years without losing citizenship) and some may still do so, but it is not the situation in British law.

If you lost or renounced your original citizenship when taking up British citizenship then this is a moot point. Even if there was a restriction saying you couldn't move without losing your British citizenship it wouldn't be enforcable to naturalised citizens who only have British citizenship as this would leave them stateless.

[JAJ]

If you lost or renounced your original citizenship when taking up British citizenship then this is a moot point. Even if there was a restriction saying you couldn't move without losing your British citizenship it wouldn't be enforcable to naturalised citizens who only have British citizenship as this would leave them stateless.

There are no legal or practical reasons why wider deprivation provisions would not be enforceable. And there has to be at least some chance that that an amendment to the Nationality Act sometime the next few years the existing statelessness exemption from deprivation for "undesirable" British citizens will be repealed.

International law, such that it exists (Britain has not signed the European convention on this anyway) would not be applicable in domestic courts.

[JAJ]

I don't know whether it is because I suffered a Jesuit education (don't worry, I'm recovering ) , but my own view is that it's really an issue of personal integrity - I just don't think it is right for someone to make a declaration that they intend to continue to live in UK when they've already bought the ticket for emigration to the other side of the world.

Depends on what one means by "emigration" though. Many newly naturalised British citizens who move overseas do plan to return to the UK after a few years. Or someone may naturalise with a medium term plan to leave the UK, but nothing immediate.

The Home Office IND must of course enforce the law as set down by Parliament, but my own view is that a person who has lived for 5+ years in the United Kingdom and obtained settlement has by definition "thrown in" a significant part of his or her life with the United Kingdom. Irrespective of what that persons medium to long term intentions may be.

[Christophe]

If you lost or renounced your original citizenship when taking up British citizenship then this is a moot point. Even if there was a restriction saying you couldn't move without losing your British citizenship it wouldn't be enforcable to naturalised citizens who only have British citizenship as this would leave them stateless.

That's certainly true as the law stands now, although it could be changed. Provisions to avoid statelessness are not universal - for example, it is perfectly possible for US citizens with no other nationality to renounce their US citizenship voluntarily and thereby render themselves stateless. Most people would consider that an extraordinarily foolish thing to do, but it is possible to do it.

[sally1]

so when it comes to filling in the natrulisation form based on 5 yr residence, do i need to complete the section asking for husband details and also provide a marriage certificate?

[ppron747]

so when it comes to filling in the natrulisation form based on 5 yr residence, do i need to complete the section asking for husband details

Yes - there's nothing on the form suggesting that this information is only required if you're applying on the basis of being married to a BC - it simply asks for the name and details of your spouse, and if you have one, I think you're bound to supply the information

and also provide a marriage certificate?

No - the list of documentary evidence on page 30 of the guide mentions the marriage certificate only in connection with applications made on the basis of marriage to a British citizen; if yours isn't, no marriage certificate should be necessary.

I suggest that, since your wish to apply "in your own right", following five years residence is unusual, it would be an idea to make this clear in a covering letter, and also to write "I am applying under section 6(1) BNA 1981, NOT section 6(2)" on the form, somewhere around question 1.29, just to make sure.....