Facts: The applicant was a national of Somalia who applied for naturalisation in Ireland. The naturalisation application included a Somalian passport in the applicant’s name. The applicant’s solicitor subsequently informed the Minister of the circumstances in which the passport was obtained and submitted that the applicant was unsure as to its genuineness. It was submitted that she obtained the passport in good faith via a member of the Somali community in Ireland following concerted efforts, including attempting to travel to the Somali Embassy in Belgium, to obtain a valid passport.
An internal Department of Justice and Equality document titled ‘submission/recommendation’ described how the Garda Technical Bureau found the bio-data page of the passport had been substituted for a counterfeit page. It also noted that the applicant had accepted that it may be false. The submission/recommendation stated that as a result of using a false document, the applicant did not meet the good character requirement under section 15(1)(b), Irish Nationality and Citizenship Act 1956, as amended. It recommended that the Minister refuse the application. The applicant subsequently brought judicial review proceedings challenging the refusal of her naturalisation application.
Reasoning: This case considers whether fair procedures were observed in the decision-making process to refuse the application for naturalisation and whether the submission/recommendation document on which the decision was based was accurate, complete and contextualised.
Simons J. found that the omission from the submission/recommendation of an accurate record of the explanation and exculpatory factors in the case was fatal to the validity of the decision. This included the explanations offered by the applicant for the submission of a false passport, such as the practical difficulties she faced and the lack of a functioning central government in Somalia. Recalling the Court of Appeal’s ruling in MNN v. Minister for Justice and Equality [2020] IECA 187, Simons J held that where there are serious and damaging allegations in a submission or recommendation, basic fairness and natural justice requires that any information that may assist in dispelling concerns about an applicant’s good character should be specifically highlighted for the decision-maker.
Simons J. found that as a result of the failure to record the exculpatory factors in the submission/recommendation, the ultimate decision did not contain an adequate statement of reasons.
Decision: Simons J. granted an order of certiorari setting aside the refusal and remitted the matter for fresh consideration.
