H6 -v- Secretary of State for the Home Department (order)
Appeal number: SC/205/2023
In the Special Immigration Appeals Commission
27 November 2024
Corrected under rule 54(1) of the Special Immigration Appeals
Commission (Procedure) Rules 2003 on 2 December 2024
Before:
The Special Immigration Appeals Commission
Between:
H6
-v-
Secretary of State for the Home Department
Order
UPON the Commission seeking the parties’ representations concerning the maintenance of the anonymity order made by the Chairman on 15 May 2023;
AND UPON the applicant inviting the Commission to maintain the order with additional redactions to the OPEN judgment;
AND UPON the Commission considering the applicant’s representations and the Secretary of State’s neutral position;
AND UPON the Commission considering the principle of open justice and the Commission’s Practice Note on Anonymity Orders and Related Measures;
IT IS ORDERED:
The anonymity order made by the Chairman on 15 May 2023 will be lifted with effect from 12 December 2024.
REASONS
1. In light of the OPEN evidence pertaining to the applicant, as considered at the substantive hearing of this matter from 8 to 12 July 2024, the Commission is not satisfied that the principle of open justice is outweighed by the Article 8 interests of the applicant and the other factors relied upon by the applicant in his submissions dated 14 November 2024. The grounds relied upon by the applicant do not provide a sufficient basis to derogate from the principle of open justice. That Article 8 is engaged by the applicant’s continued exclusion does not, by itself, justify derogating from the principle of open justice.
2. Lifting the order for anonymity will not prevent the applicant from continuing his business interests, whether overseas or in the United Kingdom remotely. The mere fact that publication of the OPEN judgment may attract a significant degree of media attention is not a sufficient reason to maintain anonymity. The application for continued anonymity discloses no evidential basis to conclude that lifting the order would put the applicant at any risk of harm or subject to any other detriment arising from the order being lifted such that the principle of open justice is outweighed in the circumstances of these proceedings.
3. While the Commission is mindful of the potential deterrent effect of adverse media coverage on meritorious appellants bringing proceedings before the Commission, it does not consider that that argument (which could be made in a great many tribunal or court proceedings) justifies maintaining anonymity in these proceedings.
4. As to the other persons and organisations identified by the applicant’s anonymity submissions, the Special Immigration Appeals Commission (Procedure) Rules 2003 do not in any event confer a power upon the Commission to make an order providing for the anonymity of persons or organisations other than the applicant, save where to do so is necessary to protect the anonymity of the applicant (see para. 31 of the Practice Note). Since the Commission is not satisfied that the applicant’s continued anonymity is necessary, it follows that there is no basis to make any wider order for anonymity.
5. Nothing in this order affects the Order of the Commission dated 19 July 2024. To the extent that it is necessary to protect any additional, privacy-based interests of the witnesses, individuals and organisations involved in these proceedings, that objective is achieved by the maintenance of that Order, which makes provision for the Commission to consider individual applications for access to the Commission’s documents on a case by case basis. Accordingly, any broader privacy concerns arising from access to the Commission’s documents will be addressed pursuant to that process.
6. This order will not take effect until 12 December 2024, when the OPEN and CLOSED judgments will be handed down. The Commission has adopted this approach in order to enable any relevant application for permission to appeal, and any consideration of the matters addressed in this order, to take place elsewhere prior to the judgments being handed down, if either party is so advised. That is sufficient to address the concern expressed in paragraph 5d of the written submissions by counsel for the applicant. If another court decided that anonymity should be maintained, the OPEN judgment could then be handed down with such of the redactions sought by the applicant as that court considered to be necessary.
7. Nothing in this order affects the arrangements for the handing down of, or the contents of, the CLOSED judgment.
BY THE COMMISSION
DATED this 27th day of November 2024
Corrected under rule 54(1) of the Special Immigration Appeals Commission (Procedure) Rules 2003 on the 2nd Day of December 2024