W2 -v- The Secretary of State for the Home Department (anonymity order)

Anonymity Order




 17 January 2020



The Commission




The Secretary of State for the Home Department


On the Appellant’s application for an anonymity order pursuant to rule 39(5)(h) of the Special Immigration Appeals Commission (Procedure) Rules 2003 and for an order restraining publication pursuant to section 11 of the Contempt of Court Act 1981 (‘the application’)

On the Legal Representatives’ having been notified of the application on 13 September 2019 by email

On considering the documents consisting of an Application Notice, Explanatory Note, Witness Statement of Ronald Graham and Legal Submissions (‘the documents’) lodged in accordance with paragraph 28 of the Commission’s Practice Note on Anonymity Orders and Related Measures (‘the Practice Note’), and the Secretary of State’s observations dated 1 November 2019

It is ordered that

  1. The Appellant be granted anonymity in relation to the conduct of proceedings in the Commission and be known in these proceedings as W2.
  2. Nothing may be published which, directly, or indirectly, could lead to the identification of W2 as an appellant in these proceedings before the Commission; or could lead to the identification of any member of W2’s family who is a witness in these proceedings.
  3. The Respondent shall not disclose any material produced in these proceedings to any third party pending the determination of this appeal, without permission of the Commission.
  4. 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).
  5. This order continues until the OPEN judgment has been handed down in this appeal, or further order in the meantime, unless the Appellant indicates to the Commission, as soon as the OPEN judgment is circulated in draft, that he intends to apply for it to continue after the OPEN judgment is handed down, and applies to the Commission, before that judgment is handed down, for directions for the determination of any such application.


  1. The Secretary of State does not oppose this application, but has made some observations about the factual assertions which support it. In short, the Secretary of State does not accept those assertions. The Commission is not in a position at this stage to decide what the facts are. This application is approached on the basis that the facts deposed to by Mr Graham are, or might be, true.
  2. The Commission only has power to make an anonymity order in respect of an appellant or a witness. The order as made reflects that limitation.
  3. W2 was deprived of his nationality in October 2016, having travelled to the state of which he was then a dual national. That state is now his country of nationality. He later went to an undisclosed third country, X, in which his situation is said to be precarious.
  4. W2 was deprived of his nationality on national security grounds. The Secretary of State’s assessment was that he was an Islamist extremist involved in terrorism-related activity.
  5. W2 contends that if his identity and the allegations against him were disclosed, that would put him at risk in X of treatment breaching articles 2 and/or 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights, and that it would also put his family at risk in the United Kingdom, in particular from far-right and anti-Muslim groups.
  6. W2 also relies on the potential damage to his reputation and that of his family which would result from the publication of the allegations against him, which he denies.
  7. Similar orders have already been made in other proceedings in the High Court and in the Court of Appeal.
  8. If W2’s factual case is true, publication of his name would infringe his Convention rights and those of his family. Those risks justify the encroachment into the principle of open justice, and into the article 10 rights of the media and of the public, which is made by this order.