UK set to lose court battle over expulsion orders

Date: 05/06/1997

By Leyla Linton

THE EUROPEAN Court of Justice is likely to decide later this month that EU nationals have the right of appeal against expulsion orders within the Union.

Judges will rule on two joined cases which centre on the interpretation of a 1964 EU directive on the freedom of movement of foreign nationals.

Two men, one with Irish nationality and the other French, are challenging a decision by the British authorities to ban them from entering the UK on grounds of national security.

Iranian-born Abbas Radiom acquired Irish nationality in 1982. He worked for the Iranian consular service first in Manchester, then in London, from 1983 until 1989, when the UK severed diplomatic relations with Iran and ordered him to leave.

In 1992, his solicitors asked the British authorities whether he could return to the UK to work, given his status as an EU national. This was denied. He was told that he would be deported if he tried to enter the UK and that there would be no right of appeal.

Radiom then took his case to the UK High Court, but the Home Office maintained its position.

A representative for the British Home Secretary told the Court that his decision was based on the fact that Radiom was “known to advocate violence against dissidents who objected to the Khomeini regime in Iran and that he was also known to have been involved in the collection of information about dissident Iranian nationals in the UK”. He added that, at that time, the Iranian regime was assassinating dissidents throughout Europe and elsewhere.

Singh Shingara is a French national, but originally came from India. In 1991, he was prevented from entering the UK on the personal instructions of the British Home Secretary because it “would be contrary to the interests of public policy and public security”. He was also told he had no right of appeal.

Shingara nevertheless entered the country in 1993 using his French identity card, but was arrested a week later and deported. He asked the High Court to quash the UK's decision to treat him as an illegal immigrant and expel him, and to declare that he was entitled to an appeal against the expulsion.

A representative for the Home Secretary defended his decision, saying that Shingara was “engaged in activities promoting Sikh extremism in the United Kingdom and terrorism elsewhere”. He told the court that Shingara was the leader of Babbar Khalsa in France, which he described as a Sikh organisation supporting terrorist activities in India.

The High Court referred the matter to the ECJ for interpretation. In his opinion on the case last November, Advocate-General Ruiz-Jarabo Colomer said EU nationals who had been issued with an expulsion order or refused entry to a member state on grounds of public health, public security or public policy, were entitled to challenge this before a judicial authority in the member state concerned.

Although advocates-general's opinions are not binding on the full Court, the judges normally follow their advice.