35 14. A delay of more than 4 years to consider an applicant’s application for citizenship violated the applicant’s right to fair administrative action under article 47 of the Constitution, 2010. Samira Tariq Qureshi v Cabinet Secretary for Ministry of Interior and Co-Ordination of National Government and 2 others Miscellaneous Civil Application No. 406 of 2018 High Court at Nairobi E M Muriithi, J November 7, 2019 Applications for citizenship ought to be processed in a timely manner, and in this case, a delay of 4 years was considered to be a very long time. Summary of facts The applicant sought an order to compel her registration as a Kenyan Citizen stating that the respondents had delayed to issue all relevant and necessary documents for the registration of the applicant as a Kenyan Citizen in respect of her application; that the delay was excessive, unreasonable and inexcusable; and that the respondents had breached the applicant’s legitimate expectation to fair administrative action whereas the applicant had complied with all the legal requirement for the issuance of Kenyan Citizenship. The respondents’ submissions The respondent claimed that the applicant submitted her application for citizenship on January 22, 2015 and stated that the application could not be traced in her file prompting the 2nd respondent to write a letter dated January 10, 2015 requesting her to submit her application. Key issues for determination The main issues were whether a delay of more than 4 years to consider an applicant’s application for citizenship violated the applicant’s right to fair administrative action under article 47 of the Constitution, 2010 and whether a court could order the Director, Department of Immigration Services to grant citizenship to an aggrieved applicant. Summary of judgement • On the rights of the applicant the court held that the applicant had a legal right and, consequently, the respondents a legal duty to register her if she met the qualifications of article 15(1) of the Constitution of Kenya, 2010 (Constitution) (that provided that a person who had been married to a citizen for a period of at least seven years had a legal right, on application, to be registered as a citizen). • On whether the delay was reasonable, the court held that while the court could not seize and hold the power of the Citizenship Committee of the 2nd respondent to consider CITIZENSHIP AND NATIONALITY RIGHTS CASE DIGEST