The process for obtaining UK citizenship is a significant milestone for many immigrants, especially for those who have spent numerous years on British soil representing a culmination of years of efforts, commitment, and integration into British society. Currently, an applicant to become a British citizen needs to find two referees who will vouch for their identity and say that they know of no reason the applicant is not entitled to citizenship. Referees for citizenship applications must adhere to strict guidelines, which can be quite challenging for some candidates. This means that they cannot be just anybody must meet specific eligibility criteria.
This requirement originates from the time before biometrics when the Home Office relied on third party endorsements to verify the Applicants identity. It harkens back to a simpler era prior to the advent of biometrics.
At first glance, this seems like a reasonable safeguard to ensure the authenticity of applications. However, someone an individual obtaining indefinite leave to remain would have had their biometrics collected multiple times – first in their home country before they even stepped into the UK, again at the extension application, and then once more at the settlement stage. As part of their naturalisation application, they will re-enrol their biometrics. While the referee requirement is intended to ensure the integrity of the UK citizenship application process. It’s hard to imagine how someone attempting identity theft could get through all of those measures, only to be foiled at the final stage by this outdated requirement to have an upstanding member of the community to sign a form verifying the applicant’s identity.
Critics of the current system, argue that the referee requirement is outdated and there is a need to reform.
Why are referees required?
The Referee requirement is apparently meant to verify and confirm the Applicant’s identity. Referees are asked to vouch for the applicant’s character and residency status, adding a layer of verification to ensure that citizenship is granted only to those who meet certain standards. For many years, the referee requirement has been a major component of British Nationality Law. It dates back to a period before contemporary techniques for confirming identification. To make sure candidates were who they said they were, the government relied on personal endorsements. Today, this system feels redundant and bureaucratic.
While the current referee requirement may seem reasonable in theory, the actual implementation often becomes an obstacle, as the process assumes all applicants to have access to people who meet the strict referee criteria.
When someone first looks at the requirements for British citizenship, they need to skim through the list of accepted professions and may feel a wave of nervousness and frustration about the fact that they don’t know anyone in those types of jobs.
The GOV.UK guidance does say that their list is not exhaustive, but it also doesn’t give you any indication or a hint of what other jobs might count.
There are already multiple layers of biometric checks involved in modern immigration processes. So, a person on a skilled worker route to settlement will give biometrics when applying for his/her visa abroad. They will repeat this upon getting their visa extended in the UK as well as when applying for settlement. At the naturalisation stage, they must enrol biometrics once more!
Considering these extensive measures, it’s hard to imagine how a fraudulent applicant might avoid detection by the biometric system and then be prevented by a referee requirement only to be stopped by a referee requirement. Moreover, referees are not obligated to report concerns to the Home Office. Which further undermines the effectiveness of the rules.
Key Issues with the Citizenship Referee Requirement
The current referee system has several challenges and loopholes. First, the applicant must know a professional or a well-known person to serve as a referee, this can prove to be a huge disadvantage for applicants with marginalised backgrounds or who may not have strong community ties.
Even if an applicant knows the referees, they might feel nervous to ask for their personal details. You can satisfy all the other requirements and still be barred from applying because you haven’t cultivated relationships with people in particular kinds of jobs for a certain period of time and remained in contact with them.
Additionally, the criteria for referees can discourage professionals from participating, as they might view the process as intrusive.
Does the System Even Work? ( A not so ‘Natural decision’)
A study conducted by Independent Chief Inspector of Borders and Immigration in 2014 clearly stated that ‘No checks of any sort were ever conducted on referees who were not British citizens. For British citizen referees, we found that police checks to determine their suitability to act as a referee were not conducted, although some limited checks were made against passport information held by Her Majesty’s Passport Office (HMPO). However, these checks were meaningless because they had no impact on the consideration of the nationality application and did not result in any additional checks to the suitability of referees’.
In addition, the inspection report clearly said ‘Our sampling also identified that in nearly a quarter of the cases we examined (28 cases – 22%), referees failed to meet the eligibility requirements because one or both referees were not persons of professional standing. Despite this, the failure to meet these requirements had no bearing on the decision-making process’
Does that mean that the referee requirement is just a bureaucratic red tape than a simple process? The referee requirement adds yet another layer to an already exhaustive series of verifications. Given that the applicants are already subjected to rigorous checks, including a comprehensive biometric process, the additional referee requirement appears redundant and unnecessary.
Time for Change
Considering the stringent identity checks that are now in place, it may be the to reassess the need of the current referee requirement. Those who want to become British citizen and are eligible for it might face unnecessary obstacles. Eliminating this prerequisite might streamline the application procedure and increase its accessibility for a wider group of individuals.
How should an applicant proceed if they have no suitable referee?
What if an applicant doesn’t have a suitable referee? Does it mean that they would not get citizenship even when they meet all other requirements?
Interestingly, if the Home Office determines that a referee does not meet the required criteria, they must request the person applying for citizenship to provide an alternative referee before planning to refuse the application.
The application would presumably be refused if one could not provide a suitable referee at this time. You should seek legal advice from our expert immigration advisors to discuss your options if you feel that you will not be in a position to identify suitable referees.
