This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/dec/11/uk-citizenship-nationality-checks-home-office

The article has changed 2 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
UK citizenship granted without ‘good character’ checks says watchdog UK citizenship granted without ‘good character’ checks says watchdog
(35 minutes later)
British citizenship is being granted to people who did not meet “good character” requirements because the Home Office is not scrutinising British nationality applications appropriately, according to a watchdog report.British citizenship is being granted to people who did not meet “good character” requirements because the Home Office is not scrutinising British nationality applications appropriately, according to a watchdog report.
In one case, an applicant had previously disclosed that they had stabbed someone to death before fleeing to the UK. However, a case worker from UK Visas & Immigration (UKVI) decided the application was unaware of this and granted the application.In one case, an applicant had previously disclosed that they had stabbed someone to death before fleeing to the UK. However, a case worker from UK Visas & Immigration (UKVI) decided the application was unaware of this and granted the application.
John Vine, the chief inspector of borders and immigration, said he was particularly concerned that case workers did not take into account evidence of character to satisfy themselves that the requirements of the British Nationality Act 1981 had been met. This resulted in British citizenship granted to applicants with “very poor immigration histories”. Good character includes showing respect for the rights and freedoms of the UK, observing its laws and fulfilling the duties and obligations as a resident. John Vine, the chief inspector of borders and immigration, said he was particularly concerned that case workers did not take into account evidence of character to satisfy themselves that the requirements of the British Nationality Act 1981 had been met. This resulted in British citizenship being granted to applicants with “very poor immigration histories”. Good character includes showing respect for the rights and freedoms of the UK, observing its laws and fulfilling the duties and obligations as a resident.
Besides not taking into account evidence of character, Vine faulted UKVI for failing to conduct more thorough criminal checks.Besides not taking into account evidence of character, Vine faulted UKVI for failing to conduct more thorough criminal checks.
“Apart from automated police and immigration checks, virtually no other checks were conducted to establish the good character of applicants, he said in his latest critical report of the Home Office. “Apart from automated police and immigration checks, virtually no other checks were conducted to establish the good character of applicants,” he said in his latest critical report of the Home Office.
The report said no attempts were made to check an applicant’s criminal record in the country of nationality, despite Home Office guidance on how to obtain this from many countries around the world. Even where an applicant disclosed criminal convictions overseas, it could still be difficult to refuse the application if the convictions could not be confirmed by other means.The report said no attempts were made to check an applicant’s criminal record in the country of nationality, despite Home Office guidance on how to obtain this from many countries around the world. Even where an applicant disclosed criminal convictions overseas, it could still be difficult to refuse the application if the convictions could not be confirmed by other means.
Moreover, far too much reliance was placed on self-declaration by applicants so unless an applicant declared financial problems or that they had practised tax avoidance and benefit fraud, no other checks were made to verify this. In some cases, applicants who had very poor immigration histories over long periods, including during the qualifying period for naturalisation, were granted citizenship. The poor histories included having no leave to enter or remain for long periods, working illegally and absconding.Moreover, far too much reliance was placed on self-declaration by applicants so unless an applicant declared financial problems or that they had practised tax avoidance and benefit fraud, no other checks were made to verify this. In some cases, applicants who had very poor immigration histories over long periods, including during the qualifying period for naturalisation, were granted citizenship. The poor histories included having no leave to enter or remain for long periods, working illegally and absconding.
“The granting of British citizenship is a profoundly significant step for both the individual and the UK,” said Vine. “Therefore, I was concerned to find that nationality casework (part of UKVI) had not struck the right balance between this and the need to scrutinise applications thoroughly to ensure that decisions to grant British citizenship were evidence-based. UKVI guidance which allowed caseworkers to disregard evasion of immigration control during the qualifying period, where there was no other evidence to cast doubt on an applicant’s good character, had resulted in a ‘blanket approach’ being adopted.” “The granting of British citizenship is a profoundly significant step for both the individual and the UK,” said Vine. “Therefore, I was concerned to find that nationality casework [part of UKVI] had not struck the right balance between this and the need to scrutinise applications thoroughly to ensure that decisions to grant British citizenship were evidence-based. UKVI guidance which allowed case workers to disregard evasion of immigration control during the qualifying period, where there was no other evidence to cast doubt on an applicant’s good character, had resulted in a ‘blanket approach’ being adopted.”
Nationality casework’s staff of 365 based in Liverpool, handles applications for British citizenship. Between 2002 and 2013, applications for British citizenship jumped to 235,256 from 157,057. There has been a steep reduction in the likelihood of an application being refused since 2007, when the refusal rate was three times higher than in 2013. The report said this may be partly explained by the introduction of nationality checking service in 2005, which ensured that unwaivable requirements were met, prior to the application being submitted to UKVI. Some 365 workers based in Liverpool handle applications for British citizenship. Between 2002 and 2013, applications for jumped to 235,256 from 157,057. There has also been a steep rise in applications being accepted since 2007, when the refusal rate was three times higher than in 2013. The report said this may be partly explained by the introduction of a nationality checking service in 2005, which ensured that unwaivable requirements were met before an application was submitted to UKVI.
James Brokenshire, the Home Office immigration and security minister, said: “This government is ensuring that the granting of UK citizenship is treated as a privilege for those who deserve it, not an automatic right for those who do not. The chief inspector’s report endorses our decision to grant or deny citizenship in the overwhelming majority of cases it examined. Where it identifies errors, most of the issues raised are the result of wrong-headed decisions taken by the previous government before we scrapped the failing and dysfunctional UK border agency. In particular, their decision in 2007 to grant a large number of people the right to remain here indefinitely, even if they did not meet the rules.” James Brokenshire, the Home Office immigration and security minister, said: “This government is ensuring that the granting of UK citizenship is treated as a privilege for those who deserve it, not an automatic right for those who do not. The chief inspector’s report endorses our decision to grant or deny citizenship in the overwhelming majority of cases it examined.
The latest report was submitted to Theresa May, the home secretary, at the beginning of September. Vine, who is stepping down at the end of the year early, has expressed frustration at the Home Office sitting on his reports for months. Another report on overstayers is also due. “Where it identifies errors, most of the issues raised are the result of wrong-headed decisions taken by the previous government before we scrapped the failing and dysfunctional UK border agency. In particular, their decision in 2007 to grant a large number of people the right to remain here indefinitely, even if they did not meet the rules.”
The latest report was submitted to Theresa May, the home secretary, at the beginning of September. Vine, who is stepping down early at the end of the year, has expressed frustration at the Home Office sitting on his reports for months. Another report on overstayers is also due.
Last week, a report from the chief inspector revealed that a flagship Home Office scheme to deport foreign criminals and save £10m a year had led to only two offenders leaving the UK.Last week, a report from the chief inspector revealed that a flagship Home Office scheme to deport foreign criminals and save £10m a year had led to only two offenders leaving the UK.
The report – which Theresa May, the home secretary, has sat on for more than five months – says a Home Office target of removing 62 immigration offenders under a conditional cautioning scheme has been wildly missed during the past 12 months. The report – which May has had for more than five months – says a Home Office target of removing 62 immigration offenders under a conditional cautioning scheme has been missed during the past 12 months.