ON APPEAL FROM THE UPPER TRIBUNAL (IMMIGRATION AND
THE HON. MR. JUSTICE MCCLOSKEY &
DEPUTY UPPER TRIBUNAL JUDGE HOLMES
 UKUT 118 (IAC)
Strand, London, WC2A 2LL
B e f o r e :
LORD JUSTICE SALES
SIR STEPHEN RICHARDS
| Abdul Aziz
Qari Abdul Rauf
|- and -
|Secretary of State for the Home Department
Cathryn McGahey QC and Vinesh Mandalia (instructed by Government Legal Department Litigation Group) for the Respondent
Hearing date: 18 July 2018
Crown Copyright ©
Lord Justice Sales:
"(1) In this section a reference to a person's "citizenship status" is a reference to his status as-"
(a) a British citizen,
(b) a British overseas territories citizen,
(c) a British Overseas citizen,
(d) a British National (Overseas),
(e) a British protected person, or
(f) a British subject.
(2) The Secretary of State may by order deprive a person of a citizenship status if the Secretary of State is satisfied that deprivation is conducive to the public good.
(4) The Secretary of State may not make an order under subsection (2) if he is satisfied that the order would make a person stateless.
(4A) But that does not prevent the Secretary of State from making an order under subsection (2) to deprive a person of a citizenship status if-
(a) the citizenship status results from the person's naturalisation,
(b) the Secretary of State is satisfied that the deprivation is conducive to the public good because the person, while having that citizenship status, has conducted him or herself in a manner which is seriously prejudicial to the vital interests of the United Kingdom, any of the Islands, or any British overseas territory, and
(c) the Secretary of State has reasonable grounds for believing that the person is able, under the law of a country or territory outside the United Kingdom, to become a national of such a country or territory.
(5) Before making an order under this section in respect of a person the Secretary of State must give the person written notice specifying -
(a) that the Secretary of State has decided to make an order,
(b) the reasons for the order, and
(c) the person's right of appeal under section 40A (1) or under section 2B of the Special Immigration Appeals Commission Act 1997.
(6) Where a person acquired a citizenship status by the operation of a law which applied to him because of his registration or naturalisation under an enactment having effect before commencement, the Secretary of State may by order deprive the person of the citizenship status if the Secretary of State is satisfied that the registration or naturalisation was obtained by means of -
(b) false representation, or
(c) concealment of a material fact."
"Abdul Aziz, I have to sentence you for conspiracy to engage in sexual activity with a child by penetrative sex and trafficking for sexual exploitation a 15 year old girl. You are an intelligent man referred to by some of your co-accused as The Master. You took over from Shabir Ahmed and ran this operation with Melissa Kirk. You took the victim who was so many years younger than you to the Jackie Street flat. You knew that she had been or was to be plied with weed and vodka. You then coerced her into sex with men. You took her there several times a week for a period of three months. You also took her twice to a flat in Falinge and to Ashworth Valley. You received money from these men. You made her have anal sex when she was menstruating. I accept that you did not have sexual intercourse with her yourself.
Society finds this sort of behaviour repugnant. In my view, having watched you carefully during this trial, I am satisfied that the degree of coercion you used towards her was real and severe and that this constitutes an additional aggravating factor. As far as the conspiracy count is involved you were aware that a large number of men were involved and several girls.
The sentence on you, despite your previous good character must be severe. On the count of trafficking you will go to prison for nine years, on the count of conspiracy nine years concurrent.
Abdul Rauf, you have to be sentenced with trafficking a 15 year old girl and conspiracy. The trafficking varied between your driving her to a lonely area near Heywood and having sex with her in your taxi and driving her to a flat in Rochdale where you and others had sex with her. On the evidence this happened from 10 to 20 times. The image you gave during this trial was of a deeply hypocritical individual. I accept that you have health issues. On the count of trafficking you will go to prison for six years, on the count of conspiracy for six years concurrent.
Adil Khan, you fall to be sentenced for two offences of conspiracy and trafficking a 15 year old girl. During the course of this case the jury heard that you, in your forties had formed a relationship with a 15 year old girl from which she became pregnant. Until you were forced to do so by scientific proof you refused to admit that relationship. Having met another 15 year old at one address you trafficked her to another, where she had sex with you and another about four times. When she remonstrated with you about what you were ordering her to do, you used violence towards here. You too are an intelligent man and also in my view a hypocrite. On the trafficking count you will go to prison for eight years with eight years concurrent on the conspiracy counts. …"
"British citizenship is a privilege that confers particular entitlements and benefits, including the right to a British passport and the right to vote in general elections. It is not in the public interest that individuals who engage in serious and/or organised crime, which constitutes a flagrant abuse of British values, enjoy those entitlements and benefits."
"Conduciveness to the public good means depriving in the public interest on grounds of involvement in terrorism, espionage, serious organised crime, war crimes or unacceptable behaviours."
Ground (1): the guidance in Delialissi
"55. The absence of a statutory requirement to hypothesise removal, does not, however mean that removal as a consequence of deprivation is automatically excluded from the factors to be considered by the Tribunal hearing a section 40A appeal. Removal will be relevant if, and insofar as the Tribunal finds, as a matter of fact, that in the circumstances of the particular case, it is a reasonably foreseeable consequence of depriving the person of British citizenship.
56. Indeed, the whole focus of a section 40A appeal is to ascertain the reasonably foreseeable consequences of deprivation, whether or not involving removal. Thus, even if removal is too uncertain to feature directly as a consequence, the possibility of removal and any period of uncertainty following deprivation may require to be taken into account in assessing the effect that deprivation would have, not only on the appellant but also on members of his family."
"I agree with [counsel for AB and counsel for the Secretary of State] that it is not for the Tribunal, in the present proceedings, to pre-judge the outcome of any appeal that the appellant may bring against a decision to deport her. It would, nevertheless, be wrong to make a finding regarding the reasonably foreseeable consequences of deprivation that ignores this aspect. The Tribunal must take a view as to whether, from its present vantage point, there is likely to be force in any challenge to deportation that the appellant can be expected to bring. The stronger the case, the less likely it will be that the reasonably foreseeable consequences of deprivation will include removal from the United Kingdom …"
Sir Stephen Richards:
Sir Terence Etherton MR: