Recommendation 36

As the Supreme Court has noted, to comply with the procedural requirements of the ECHR, an appellant must be able to challenge the legality of the measure taken against him, and the right of appeal must be meaningful and effective. In circumstances where an individual does not know they are subject to a deprivation of citizenship order, the right of appeal is meaningless, particularly where time limits will be applied. Applying time limits to an appeal against an uncommunicated deprivation of citizenship order risks violating the right to a fair trial as protected by Article 6. If clause 9 is to be retained in the Bill, we suggest that it would be fairer and clearer to include provision that the time limits only start running from the date of knowledge of the deprivation of citizenship order.