§ 10. Mr. Andrew Dismore (Hendon) (Lab)How many individuals have had (a) nationality and (b) indefinite leave to remain removed under the Nationality Immigration and Asylum Act 2002; and if he will make a statement. [155753]
§ The Minister for Citizenship and Immigration(Beverley Hughes)The Home Secretary has exercised his right under the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002 to remove citizenship from one individual. That individual has appealed, and the case is currently awaiting a hearing by the Special Immigration Appeals Commission.
We are not currently aware that the provisions to revoke indefinite leave to remain under section 76 of the Act have been used. Both measures were passed by Parliament to be used by Ministers sparingly and, in relation to section 76, in the special circumstances in which we could not deport someone. However, where removal is possible, indefinite leave to remain is invalidated automatically as part of the removals process.
§ Mr. DismoreIs there not a serious loophole? A year on, Abu Hamza's appeal still has not been heard and his lawyers are threatening a seven-year legal battle. Every terrorist suspect so far, from the shoe bomber to the ricin plotters, has left a trail of slime leading back to Hamza. The British people, including most Muslims, cannot understand and do not accept the fact that Hamza is allowed to block the road every Friday to spout his anti-semitism, holocaust denial and hatred of our country and our society, from Her Majesty the Queen downwards. Why has he not been put behind bars, thrown out or extradited to the Yemen to stand trial for his terrorist offences there? When will we deal with this evil influence in our society and get rid of him once and for all?
§ Beverley HughesI share my hon. Friend's frustration, but the timing of the appeal is in the hands of the Special Immigration Appeals Commission, which is the court, and not in the hands of the Home Office. SIAC is keen to make early progress. The funding was in the hands of the Legal Services Commission. We are not at liberty to interfere in either the funding or the court process. However, I assure him that any opportunity to prosecute this individual will be taken and that the local police are monitoring him very closely, including outside the mosques on Friday, and are currently investigating allegations in a newspaper about one recent sermon.
§ Mr. David Cameron (Witney) (Con)Is the Minister personally content with the current powers that she and the Home Secretary have to expel people they believe may pose a risk to this country? Yes or no?
§ Beverley HughesWe have taken the powers that are available to us, but in the implementation and exercising of those powers we have to give people rights of appeal, which exposes them to court processes, over which—rightly, many would argue—we have no jurisdiction. 13 That is the position in this case: it is in the appeals process, and we must allow SIAC to determine the outcome. I hope that it will do so as soon as possible.
§ Mr. Humfrey Malins (Woking) (Con)Will the Asylum and Immigration (Treatment of Claimants, etc.) Bill enable a person wrongly deprived of citizenship or indefinite leave to remain to appeal to the courts against that deprivation on a point of law?
§ Beverley HughesThe Bill has very little bearing on that question, as it deals with arrangements to translate into a single tier appeals processes arising from asylum and other applications. The SIAC process is separate from that, and is confined to this kind of case. As the hon. Gentleman knows, there is the opportunity outside SIAC, with permission, for people to go to higher courts.