New UK Nationality and Borders Bill Causes Concern Amongst Minorities
Protests against the Nationality and Borders Bill took place at the beginning of this month in the U.K., as there are fears that its introduction will disproportionately affect ethnic minorities.
Clause 9 of the Nationality and Borders Bill, introduced at the committee stage, would excuse the Home Office from having to give notice to individuals whose citizenship is intended to be revoked, if issues of national security, public interest or practicality require it. The Bill passed its second reading in the House of Lords this month even if it comes after a ruling (D4 v Secretary of State for the Home Department) which restricted the State’s capacity to revoke citizenship. This High Court ruling rendered void a regulation that permitted the revocation of citizenship without notice of this ever actually reaching the individual affected.
In November 2021 Special Rapporteur on Trafficking in Persons Siobhán Mullally sent a letter to the UK Government in which she deemed the Nationality and Borders Bill to be a violation of human rights and of the UK’s obligations under international and refugee laws. The letter was also signed by Special Rapporteur on Human Rights Of Migrants Felipe González Morales, by Special Rapporteur on the Promotion And Protection Of Human Rights While Countering Terrorism Fionnuala Ní Aoláin, by Tomoya Obokata, Special Rapporteur on Contemporary Forms Of Slavery, and was also endorsed by Reem Alsalem, Special Rapporteur on Violence Against Women.
In the letter, the experts point to the fact that the Bill raises doubts on the U.K.’s obligations to identify and assist migrant victims of trafficking and modern slavery, and fails to acknowledge the effects of the victims’ trauma, which may result in late communication of information related to trafficking. This concern relates to clause 58(2) of the Bill, which requires late provision of information to be regarded as damaging to credibility.
The experts were also concerned that the Bill does not take into account the difficulties faced by victims with disabilities, who face additional barriers to reporting trafficking and to identification. The Bill reduces the period of recovery and reflection for victims of trafficking and modern slavery from 45 to 30 days. Worries also relate to penalizing asylum-seekers and refugees, thus infringing on the non-punishment principle of international law. Seeking and enjoying asylum is a fundamental human right.
This Bill is under debate in the context of declarations by Justice Secretary Dominic Raab that there will be legislative reform meant to impose a “healthy dose of common sense” on the U.K.’s human rights legislation, especially the Human Rights Act 1998, which transposed the provisions of the European Convention of Human Rights into domestic English legislation. The reforms would allow English judges more flexibility when interpreting rulings from a European court. This proposal attracted a great deal of criticism from the Labour party and legal organisations.