Written evidence from Ms Tabitha Sprague (NBB0058)

Responses to Questions

Do these reforms adequately address any remaining areas of unjustified discrimination in British nationality law?

Response: No.

There should be an on-going scrutiny and review by the Home Office and an independent panel of legal minds to continue to identify other areas of discrimination and unfair laws, with a view of legislating to correct these further anomalies. Plus, an amendment should be included in the upcoming bill that going forward all nationality decisions must consider whether said decision practices any form of gender discrimination, and how it can be corrected if it is discriminatory.

Retrospective applicants for registration for British & British Overseas Territories ‘BOTC’ citizenship should not be subjected to fees and should not have to complete biometrics or attend a citizenship ceremony. The citizenship ceremony for UKF, UKM, and BOTC applicants born abroad should be optional or removed entirely. Many overseas applicants do not live close to a British Embassy, Consulate, or other authorized processing/biometric facilities to assist in their application. Such an applicant is likely to incur very high costs in completing just the basics for their application to go forward such as travel, hotels, etc. After decades of discrimination, it’s the least the government can do.

Remove both the requirement to obtain biometrics and attend a citizenship ceremony for UKF applicants born in and applying from the UK. These are children who had they not been discriminated against would have acquired British citizenship in the same way as children born in marriage to a British parent. The requirement to obtain biometrics and attend a citizenship ceremony marks children born illegitimately as different, as not equal. Also, since there is a ceremony fee, the process is cost prohibitive for some applicants. There is no logic for forcing a child born out of wedlock to complete additional and unnecessary steps towards their British citizenship that no child born in marriage to a British parent must complete for the same exact result.

The application process should be simple and straightforward. Home Office officials responsible for the processing of applications should not view & treat citizenship by descent or otherwise by descent applicants as if they are immigrants. They are not. A completely different view and approach is therefore required. Applicants should be treated by Home Office/UKVI staff as if they had been born in mainland UK and applying for their first passport.

Home Office examiners/application processors should take the view of trying to help people secure the relevant documentation from government systems that will help support their applications. With the passage of time, some applicants may have issues obtaining the required proof. A helpful constructive supportive role & response by the Home Office would help applicant overcome such difficulties. Be cognizant of spelling mistakes in names, and don’t just deny applicants on small technicalities. Remember, some records are held on paper and maybe handwritten and deteriorate over time.

Reduce the significant amount of time it takes for the Home Office/UKVI to register UKF, UKM, and BOTC applicants. Between February 2017 and August 2018, it took an average 95 calendar days for a UKF application outcome. This was longer during the pandemic. This is unacceptable. Had these children been born in marriage it would take less than a month and would result in a British passport arriving in the post. These application outcomes do not factor in the amount of time waiting for and attending the citizenship ceremony, or the process of applying for their first British passport. The latter adds additional time to the route to citizenship. (https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/ukf_application_statistics_2017#incoming-1285422)

I support the Supreme Court ruling on Romein (Advocate General for Scotland v Romein) and hope this will be extended to children born out of wedlock to British fathers by descent in the same manner that it is applied to children born to British mothers by descent.

The current bill should be amended to incorporate the 3rd and 4th generation of children of Chaggosian descent born abroad. These people, through no fault of their own, are generational casualties of a major historical injustice after their parents & grandparents BIOT/BOTC citizens were forcibly removed from their home islands 1960s. By now, every person in government should be well-aware of the generational trauma, sadness, and anxiety inflicted on these families. The knock-on effects continue to this day. They have been discarded and ignored by successive governments of all parties. The children and grandchildren are treated like immigrants, they are not, they are ‘just as British’ as the next person. A special provision should be created to give them citizenship by descent.

Do proposed changes to the application and appeals process for asylum applicants provide adequate human rights protection, including provisions providing for credibility and the weight given to evidence to be affected by the timeliness of applications and supportive evidence?