Jackson, R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department
[2024] EWHC 2012 (Admin)
Kanja Sandy, R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department
27 March 2023
[2023] EWHC 640 (Admin)
High Court
A man who fought in a civil war and helped a bad leader wanted to become a British citizen. Even though he's been a good citizen for many years, the government said his past actions meant he wasn't a 'good character' and refused his application. A judge agreed with the government.
Key Facts
- •Kanja Sandy, born in Sierra Leone in 1972, served as an aide-de-camp to Johnny Paul Koroma during Sierra Leone's civil war (1990-2001).
- •Sandy participated in combat operations and was a military trainer for the Koroma regime, which committed numerous atrocities.
- •After the fall of the Koroma government, Sandy fled to the UK in 2001, claiming asylum and highlighting his military service to establish risk of reprisal.
- •He was granted asylum and later indefinite leave to remain (ILR) in 2011.
- •Sandy applied for naturalisation in 2011 and 2019, failing to disclose his wartime activities. His applications were refused due to concerns about his good character.
- •Judicial review proceedings challenged the refusal, focusing on whether the decision-maker adequately considered mitigating factors, distance from past associations, and the degree of Sandy's personal involvement in war crimes.
Legal Principles
For naturalisation, the applicant must be of 'good character' under section 6(1) and Schedule 1 para 1(1)(b) of the British Nationality Act 1981.
British Nationality Act 1981
Determining 'good character' is an evaluation, not a purely discretionary exercise, requiring a moral assessment based on the balance of probabilities.
R (on the application of Al-Enein) v SSHD [2019] EWCA Civ 2024, R (Amin) v SSHD [2022] EWCA Civ 439
Judicial review of a 'good character' determination is highly deferential, only setting aside decisions that are demonstrably unreasonable in the Wednesbury sense.
Associated Provincial Picture Houses Ltd v Wednesbury Corpn [1948] 1 KB 223, R v SSHD ex parte Fayed (No. 2) [2000] EWCA Civ 523
Proportionality review is not applicable in naturalisation cases, despite arguments suggesting it should be considered due to its impact on fundamental rights.
Keyu & Ors v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs & Anor [2015] UKSC 69, Begum v SSHD [2023] Appeal No SC/163/2019
Outcomes
The claim for judicial review was dismissed.
The Secretary of State's decision was found to be a conventional and impeccable assessment of the evidence, even if the moral weight of past actions was not outweighed by subsequent good conduct. The court held that proportionality review was not the appropriate standard of review.
Similar Cases
Gjelosh Kolicaj v Secretary of State for the Home Department
[2023] UKUT 294 (IAC)
OBN (a minor), R (on the application of) v The Secretary of State for the Home Department
[2024] EWHC 1833 (Admin)
R3 v Secretary of State for the Home Department
[2023] EWCA Civ 169
B4 v Secretary of State for the Home Department
[2024] EWCA Civ 900