Case No SC/147/2018
In the Special Immigration
26 May 2020
The Secretary of State for the Home Department
UPON the Commission having previously ordered on 2 July 2018 (i) that O3 be granted anonymity in relation to his appeal proceedings before the Commission, pursuant to Rule 39(5)(h) of the Special Immigration Appeals Commission (Procedure) Rules 2003 and (ii) restraint on publication pursuant to section 11 of the Contempt of Court Act 1981 (‘the Anonymity Order’);
UPON the Commission, in response to the Secretary of State’s application of 13 November 2018 for the Anonymity Order to be continued and amended to clarify the reporting restrictions, having ordered on 4 March 2019 that the Anonymity Order be continued;
UPON the Secretary of State’s application of 15 May 2020 for paragraph 2 of the Anonymity Order to be amended to specify the reporting restrictions;
UPON the Legal Representatives of media organisations (as defined in the Practice Note) having been notified by the Secretary of State on 12 May 2020 of the application and provided with an Explanatory Note;
UPON considering the material provided by the Secretary of State on 15 May 2020 (‘the documents’), including the application, witness statements and draft order, lodged in accordance with the modified procedure suggested by the Secretary of State and approved by the Commission on 13 May 2020;
AND UPON the Appellant and Secretary of State undertaking to keep the Commission and the Secretary of State informed of any matter which may affect the continued need for this Order;
It is HEREBY ordered that:
- The Appellant be granted anonymity for the purposes of proceedings in the Commission and be known in these proceedings as ‘O3’.
- Nothing may be published which, directly, or indirectly, identifies O3 as an appellant in these proceedings before the Commission. This includes (but is not limited to) details of O3’s:
- Current and former addresses;
- Nationality and/or country of return;
- Ethnicity; and
- Family members.
- There be liberty to apply on 48 hours’ written notice to the Commission, to the Appellant, to the Secretary of State and to the Legal Representatives (as defined in the Practice Note).
The appellant faces deportation on national security grounds.
His case is that he is no risk to national security but that if his identity is made public there is a real risk that he will suffer mistreatment contrary to the European Convention on Human Rights by the authorities of the country to which it is proposed to return him. That the proceedings involve the appellant’s rights, including potential threats to his safety or the safety of his family members is not disputed by the Secretary of State for the Home Department.
Identification by direct or indirect means, including by a process of ‘jig-saw’ compilation will heighten the risk.
In all the circumstances, the chance that the risk will materialise outweighs the Article 10 rights of the public and the media to report his identity. Accordingly, this incursion into the principle of open justice is justified.
Dated this 26th day of May 2020
By the Commission