UK Citizenship Under Siege: New Laws and Policies Reshape the Path to British Nationality

These measures reflect a clear shift: citizenship is being treated less as a right and more as a conditional privilege tied to security and migration control.

Key Takeaways

• The 2025 reforms mark a significant shift, treating citizenship more as a conditional privilege than a permanent status.
• The Citizenship Deprivation Bill keeps deprivation orders in force throughout all appeals, prolonging uncertainty for those affected.
• The new “good character” rules bar applicants with previous illegal entry, including refugees arriving by small boat, from gaining citizenship except in rare cases.
• The Refugee Family Reunion scheme was suspended in September 2025, forcing families to meet stricter Appendix FM requirements.
• Courts continue to uphold safeguards, stressing fairness, factual accuracy, and human rights, though protections against statelessness have been weakened.
• Legal advice is essential for those facing deprivation orders, refusals under good character rules, or family separation under the new system.

The Citizenship Deprivation Bill: Keeping Appeals in Check

One of the most significant legislative developments this year has been the introduction of the Deprivation of Citizenship Orders (Effect during Appeal) Bill to Parliament in June 2025. This bill represents a fundamental shift in how UK citizenship deprivation cases are handled during the appeals process.

Under the current system, individuals who successfully appeal their citizenship deprivation automatically have their status restored while government appeals continue. The new legislation would change this entirely, ensuring that deprivation orders remain in effect throughout all appeals processes, including any further government appeals to higher courts. This means that individuals stripped of their citizenship would remain non-citizens until every legal avenue has been completely exhausted.

The government’s rationale is clear: to “protect the UK from people who pose a threat to national security or public order by preventing those who have been deprived of British citizenship from regaining that status”. The bill also aims to prevent individuals from undermining deprivation actions by renouncing other nationalities during appeals, which could potentially render them stateless and complicate removal proceedings.

Importantly, the bill doesn’t alter existing appeal rights or change the legal grounds for deprivation. Instead, it extends the approach already used in asylum and human rights appeals to citizenship cases, including appeals that reach the Supreme Court.

The “Good Character” Revolution: Barring Illegal Arrivals from Citizenship

Perhaps the most controversial policy change of 2025 has been the overhaul of the “good character” requirements for British citizenship applications. Implemented in February 2025, the new policy establishes a blanket presumption against granting citizenship to anyone who previously entered the UK illegally, regardless of how much time has passed.

The revised policy makes clear that from 10 February 2025, citizenship applications will usually be refused if the applicant previously entered the UK unlawfully, regardless of how long ago that occurred. This particularly affects refugees who arrived via what the government terms “dangerous journeys,” including small boat crossings or concealed transport in vehicles.

Legal Challenges and International Law Concerns

The policy has sparked intense debate about its compliance with international law. Immigration lawyers and refugee advocacy groups argue that the policy constitutes “penalisation” of refugees for their mode of arrival, potentially breaching Article 31 of the Refugee Convention. 

Colin Yeo from Garden Court Chambers has described it as “a clear breach of the Refugee Convention,” noting that denial of citizenship for reasons of illegal entry constitutes prohibited penalisation.

The United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) issued important guidelines in September 2024 clarifying that Article 31 prohibits states from imposing penalties on refugees “because of their irregular entry or presence”. The term “penalties” is interpreted broadly to include discriminatory, retributive, or deterrent measures.

Despite these concerns, Lord Hanson of Flint, the Minister of State at the Home Office, has defended the policy as compliant with international obligations, emphasising that while applications may be refused, individuals retain the right to apply and can still be granted citizenship in “exceptional, compelling and mitigating” circumstances.[2]

Legal Challenges in the Courts: The Kolicaj Case and Beyond

The courts continue to play a crucial role in scrutinising citizenship deprivation procedures. The Gjelosh Kolicaj case, currently before the Supreme Court, has highlighted ongoing concerns about procedural fairness in deprivation decisions.

Kolicaj was deprived of British citizenship after being convicted of money laundering. The Court of Appeal found that the Home Secretary’s process was procedurally unfair because Kolicaj wasn’t given a chance to make representations before the deprivation decision was made. The case highlights the importance of due process even in cases involving serious criminal convictions.

In another significant development, the Supreme Court’s decision in U3 v Secretary of State for the Home Department in July 2025 further tightened restrictions on citizenship deprivation appeals. The case involved a British-Moroccan dual national who travelled to ISIL-controlled territory in Syria, and the Court’s decision has been seen as limiting the scope for successful appeals in national security cases.

Legal Safeguards and Ongoing Challenges

Despite the government’s increasingly restrictive approach, the courts continue to enforce important legal safeguards. Recent cases have emphasized several key principles:

Procedural fairness remains paramount, with courts insisting that individuals must have adequate opportunity to respond to allegations before decisions are made. 

Factual accuracy is crucial, with the Home Office required to base decisions on credible evidence rather than suspicion or assumption. 

Human rights considerations, particularly the right to family life under Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights, continue to provide important protections.

The legal framework also maintains important protections against statelessness, though these have been weakened by legislative changes that allow deprivation even when it may leave someone without nationality, provided they could potentially acquire citizenship elsewhere.

Get to know about: Deprivation of Citizenship in the UK vs Other Countries: A Comparative Analysis

Speak to Our Citizenship Lawyers

The UK’s approach to citizenship is becoming more restrictive, with new laws and policies reshaping access and appeal rights. If you are affected by deprivation orders, family reunion suspensions, or the revised “good character” rules, timely legal advice is critical. 

Our team can assess your options, protect your rights, and represent you through every stage of the process. Contact us today for confidential guidance.