No entry via Shutterstock

A complex case in the Special Immigration Appeals Commission (Siac) raises concerns about a key new counter terrorism tool that the government is trying to get through parliament.

The counter-terrorism bill includes proposals to bring in temporary exclusion orders to keep those suspected of extremist activity abroad out of the UK.

The defendant in the Siac case, known as ZZ for legal reasons, was excluded from the UK in 2005 and has for the first time this week had the opportunity to give live evidence in his case.

ZZ told Siac that being separated from his wife and children for ten years was “like dying slowly”. The decision of the home secretary to exclude ZZ was taken while he was on a short trip abroad and he originally had no way of appealing the decision.

This was despite the fact that his wife and children are British born and had been resident in the UK their whole lives. ZZ holds dual French and Algerian nationality, and had lived in the UK since the early 90’s, as was his right as an EU citizen.

Under current law somebody who is excluded from the UK cannot appeal that decision. It was 15 months after his exclusion that ZZ found a way of getting his case heard in court. He attempted to enter the UK and was refused entry – a decision that can be appealed. But even then the process through which he had to go through to hear and answer the allegations against him took a further nine years.

A key measure

Temporary exclusion measures for British citizens are one of the key things the government is trying to introduce through its counter terrorism bill. Currently only EU or foreign nationals can be excluded from the country.

The new measures will be used alongside confiscation of passports and citizenship stripping, a process that has been investigated by the Bureau over the past two years.

When ZZ’s case first came before Siac, in 2008, the government refused to disclose any of the allegations against him and so the case then went on to the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) in Luxembourg, via the UK Court of Appeal. In Luxembourg, ZZ won the right to hear the allegations against him as an EU citizen being denied free movement within the EU: it was the first time he heard the allegations against him and five years after his exclusion from the UK.