Powers to stop alleged extremists stripped of their British citizenship from re-entering the country have cleared the Commons, despite concerns it creates a “two-tier” system.
The Deprivation of Citizenship Orders (Effect during Appeal) Bill was passed at third reading by MPs, and will now go to the House of Lords for further scrutiny.
Under the legislation, alleged extremists who lose their British citizenship but win an appeal against the decision will not have it reinstated before the Home Office has exhausted all avenues for appeal.
During the Bill’s committee stage, Labour MP Bell Ribeiro-Addy said black, Asian and ethnic minority communities will be “alarmed” by the proposals.
Home Office minister Dan Jarvis said the legislation has “nothing to do with somebody’s place of birth, but everything to do with their behaviour”.
Speaking in the Commons on Monday, Conservative former minister Kit Malthouse said: “My trouble with this legislation is that it puts a question mark over certain citizens.
“When it’s used with increasing frequency, it does put a question mark over people’s status as a citizen of the United Kingdom, and that, I think, is something that ought to be of concern.”
Intervening, Mr Jarvis said: “He’s making his points in a very considered way, but he is levelling quite serious charges against the Government.
“Can I say to him, in absolute good faith, that our intentions here have nothing to do with somebody’s place of birth, but everything to do with their behaviour.”
Mr Malthouse said: “I’m not concerned about it necessarily falling into his hands as a power, but we just don’t know who is going to be in his place in the future, and we’re never quite sure how these powers might develop.”
He continued: “What I’m trying to do with my amendment is to explain to him that this is an area of law where I would urge him to tread carefully, where I would urge him to think about the compromises that he’s creating against our basic freedoms that we need to maintain.”
The MP for North West Hampshire had tabled an amendment which would allow a person to retain their citizenship during an appeals process if they face “a real and substantial threat of serious harm” as a result of the order.
It would also have required a judge to suspend the removal of citizenship if the person’s ability to mount an effective defence at a subsequent appeal was impacted, or the duration of the appeal process was excessive because of an act or omission by a public authority.
Ms Ribeiro-Addy spoke in support of the amendment, she said: “Certain communities are often wary of legislation that touches on citizenship, because it almost always – whether it is the stated intention or not – disproportionately impacts them.
“And to put this clearly to the minister, I’m talking about people of black, Asian and minority ethnic communities, those who have parents who may have been born elsewhere, or grandparents, for that matter, they will be particularly alarmed by this legislation.
“Those of us who have entitlement to citizenship from other countries for no other reason than where our parents may have been born, or where our grandparents may have been born, or simply because of our ethnic origin, we know that we are at higher risk of having our British citizenship revoked.
“And when such legislation is passed, it creates two tiers of citizenship. It creates second-class citizens.”
The MP for Clapham and Brixton Hill added: “I would like to ask why the minister has not seen it fit to conduct an equality impact assessment on this Bill? I know it’s an incredibly narrow scope, but these potential implications are vastly potentially impact-limited to specific communities.”
At the conclusion of the committee stage, Mr Jarvis said: “The power to deprive a person of British citizenship does not target ethnic minorities or people of particular faiths, it is used sparingly where a naturalised person has acquired citizenship fraudulently, or where it is conducive to the public good.
“Deprivation on conducive grounds is used against those who pose a serious threat to the UK, or whose conduct involves high harm. It is solely a person’s behaviour which determines if they should be deprived of British citizenship, not their ethnicity or faith.”
“The impact on equalities has been assessed at all stages of this legislation,” he added.
The Bill was passed on the nod.
