residence’.37 This divergence from the 1954 Convention is particularly significant because Para
402 exclusions affect the definition of statelessness under Part 14 of the Rules.
18. Para 403 of the Immigration Rules adds additional requirements that apply before the
Government will grant leave to remain to a person who has been recognised as stateless
under the Immigration Rules. Under 403(c), applicants must not be ‘admissible to their
country of former habitual residence or any other country’. UNHCR confirms that it is
consistent with the 1954 Convention to grant a stateless person a ‘more transitional’ status
(compared to the status the State normally grants to stateless persons) if he or she ‘enjoys
permanent residence status in a country of previous habitual residence to which immediate
return is possible’.38 To comply with this, admissibility should be assessed with respect to a
country of previous habitual residence (rather than ‘any other country’), where the applicant
has permanent residency, and immediate return must be possible. Additionally, return to a
country of former habitual residence must offer
… the opportunity to live a life of security and dignity in conformity with the object and
purpose of the 1954 Convention … [which entails] a full range of civil, economic, social
and cultural rights, and where there is a reasonable prospect of obtaining nationality of
that State.39
We commend the improvement in the Government’s 2016 guidance which indicates that
‘admissibility’ entails a permanent residency requirement;40 however, we are concerned that,
at times, Government caseworkers incorrectly interpret the admissibility requirement in ways
that do not comply fully with UNHCR guidelines.41
19. Para 404 of the Immigration Rules is broader in its approach to exclusion than the 1954
Convention. Stateless persons will be refused leave to remain in the UK if:
…there are reasonable grounds for considering that they are … a danger to the
security … [or] public order of the United Kingdom; or … their application would fall
to be refused under any of the grounds set out in paragraph 322 of these Rules.
The 1954 Convention establishes which types of criminal activity which should affect either
exclusion from protection or expulsion from a State’s territory. Article 1(2) excludes stateless
persons who have committed certain very grave acts from the Convention’s protection.42
Article 31 of the 1954 Convention discusses circumstances in which stateless persons who are
‘lawfully in’ the State may be expelled for national security reasons. Whilst there are
important legal distinctions between expulsion and refusal of leave to remain (the latter not
being explicitly governed by the 1954 Convention), it is problematic that the Immigration
37
The Government’s 2016 guidance also refers to UNHCR guidance on Article 1E; however, due to the
divergent formulation of Para 402(b), guidance on Article 1E and Article 1(2)(ii) is only partially applicable to
Para 402(b). See UNHCR Note on the Interpretation of Article 1E of the 1951 Convention relating to the Status
of Refugees (UNHCR, March 2009) http://www.refworld.org/docid/49c3a3d12.html.
38
UNHCR Statelessness Handbook (note 8) paras 153-154.
39
Ibid, para 157.
40
(note 14), see Sections 1.3, 3.4, 4.4, 6.2.
41
We note, for example, that in July 2016, a Palestinian applicant was refused on the basis of admissibility to
Libya despite it being clear from the documents that he did not have a right to enter Libya or of permanent
residence there. The refusal letter said that he could apply for a visa to enter Libya. This decision was
withdrawn when challenged.
42
Crimes against peace or humanity, war crimes, serious non-political crimes (outside the country of
residence), or ‘acts contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations’.
8