Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
EARLIER THIS WEEK, a UK Tribunal ruled that people born in Northern Ireland cannot self-identify as Irish citizens only – without revoking their British citizenship first.
It was the latest finding in a case involving the Home Office and Derry woman Emma DeSouza, who is seeking a residence card for her US-born husband.
DeSouza, who identifies as Irish and is an Irish citizen, made her application on those grounds. She brought a case against the Home Office after it rejected her application because it considered her a British citizen.
However, she believes that the Home Office’s position is against the terms of the Good Friday Agreement, which gives anyone from the North the right to identify as British, Irish, or both.
The ruling led to a claim by Sinn Féin that the British government are taking away citizenship rights from those in the North. But is that accurate?
On Tuesday morning, Sinn Féin’s official Twitter account – which has almost 100,000 followers – posted a tweet and accompanying video referring to the DeSouza ruling.
It said:
The British Government are removing YOUR right to Irish citizenship. Don’t let them get away with it.
The 36-second video repeated the claim, alongside images of British Home Secretary Priti Patel, Prime Minister Boris Johnson and excerpts from the Good Friday Agreement.
It said: “The British Govt [sic] are removing your right to Irish citizenship, ruling that everyone in the North is British, directly attacking the 1998 [Good Friday] Agreement.”
The video also called on viewers to “defend your right to be Irish”.
By the time of writing, the post had more than 1,400 retweets and 2,000 ‘likes’ and the accompanying video had been watched more than 120,000 times.
On Monday, the UK’S Upper Tribunal ruled that people born in Northern Ireland cannot self-identify as Irish citizens only, without revoking their British citizenship first.
The ruling essentially means that those born in Northern Ireland are automatically seen as British citizens in the eyes of the law when they are born.
It does not change citizenship rights for those born in the North; rather, it clarifies that citizens of Northern Ireland are born British and can only become Irish after renouncing their British citizenship.
The judges stated that to do so, citizens can undergo a formal process which costs £200.
The ruling overturned a previous decision made by the First-Tier Tribunal in DeSouza’s favour, which found that immigration laws laid out in the British Nationality Act 1981 were superseded by the Good Friday Agreement.
Under Article 1 (iv)/(vi) of the Good Friday Agreement, “the birthright of all the people of Northern Ireland to identify themselves and be accepted as Irish or British, or both, as they may so choose, and accordingly confirm that their right to hold both British and Irish citizenship” is recognised by both the Irish and British governments.
But appealing the First-Tier Tribunal ruling, lawyers for the Home Office claimed that provisions on citizenship outlined in the Agreement had not been incorporated into the UK’s corresponding domestic legislation linked to it, the 1998 Northern Ireland Act.
As a result, they were successfully able to argue that an international treaty doesn’t overpower British immigration law.
The Tribunal ruled that it would infringe parliamentary sovereignty if the British government could enter into a treaty with a foreign state – in this case, Ireland – and change the domestic law of the UK without consulting parliament first.
It therefore found that immigration laws set out under the British Nationality Act do not supersede those in the Good Friday Agreement.
However, during the case, the Home Office accepted that citizens in the North could identify as British or Irish, or both during the Tribunal hearing.
It was only their legal argument that this right does right not make individuals who are born in the North legal citizens of their own choosing.
In a statement to TheJournal.ie after the ruling, the Home Office reiterated its commitment to upholding the Good Friday Agreement, as well as its acceptance of the right of those in the North to identify as Irish citizens.
“We respect the right of the people of Northern Ireland to choose to identify as British or Irish or both and their right to hold both British and Irish citizenship,” it said.
TheJournal.ie made multiple attempts to contact Sinn Féin to clarify the claim in the party’s tweet, but no response was received by the time of publication.
The British government has not removed the right to Irish citizenship from those in the North.
The Upper Tribunal ruling found that citizens in the North are automatically British citizens, but its ruling did not take away their right to become Irish citizens.
Both the Home Office and the Upper Tribunal still accept that citizens in the North can become Irish citizens under the terms of the Good Friday Agreement.
It is simply untrue to suggest the British government is removing this right or defying the Good Friday Agreement.
We rate this claim as FALSE.
As per our verdict guide, this means that the claim is inaccurate.
TheJournal.ie’s FactCheck is a signatory to the International Fact-Checking Network’s Code of Principles. You can read it here. For information on how FactCheck works, what the verdicts mean, and how you can take part, check out our Reader’s Guide here. You can read about the team of editors and reporters who work on the factchecks here.
With reporting from Gráinne Ní Aodha.
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
And we are supposed to believe that the English will honour their new brexit deal as well….history has just proven they did not implement the Good Friday Agreement…and we find out 20 years later.
@Derek Ryan: The GFA is one of very few UK constitutional texts. That they can ignore constitutional law as they see fit shows how trustworthy they are. Roll on reunification, it’ll be better for everyone to be part of our secular progressive state.
Don’t know that this is necessarily false. The British legal system is stating that anyone born in the north is automatically British and to identify as any other nationality you must pay £200 to renounce your British citizenship first. So, the GFA actually never granted any special status to people from the north vis-à-vis national identity. According to immigration law, being born in Britain does not automatically confer British citizenship. Your parents must be British or be in Britain legally, so this ruling could potentially have major implications for many people including children born to EU citizens. I had better start renouncing mine now before they come looking for me!
@Anne Marie Devlin: I’ve only looked at this fleetingly. Was there something about cost of recognising her husband as an Irish spouse was cheaper than a British spouse.
While the mechanisms seem to be there to stand by the GFA it seems to cost to have those rights awarded (correct me if I’m wrong). So the rights exist if you can pay for them seems to be the ruling
@Anne Marie Devlin: Yes and No.
Ms De Soussa and her parent(s) (presuming at least one was born in the 6 counties) were always considered British as of Birth, in the eyes of British law and indeed many other countries bar Ireland (least not officially) . Even with her entitlement to be Irish, since the day she was born, it did not revoke her British citizenship. GFA says NOTHING about that . There is a difference in what some one claims to be and the actual issue eg (bad example) I might say that I am not a Catholic, because I don’t practice, but, I was baptised as one and never really renounced it (not sure there is an official way unless I convert to another religion )
For immigration purposes, since she never left the UK, the EU courts would not, based on a very similar case before them in 2011, recognise the duel nationality (I would love to see what the courts would say in light of GFA ,however, I’d fear that they might accept the reasoning from the recent judgment)
The rule about not being automatically British, deals with stopping illegals claiming their child is British even if the parents only spent 1 day in Britain (they fixed their rules in 1986, we did it in 2004 for the same reason) . That non automatic issue is highly likely to have absolutely no bearing to Ms De Soussa even if she was born after 1986
Before the 2004 Irish Citizenship Act amendments , our Citizenship laws (1956 Act as amended) did NOT give automatic citizenship rights , as of birth, to the Irish in the 6 counties. This was given to anyone in the South .
What was given to the Nordies was that were “entitled” to be Irish and this would be proven by getting an Irish passport. I accept one might see little difference in that in practice, but there kinda is a difference, albeit a small one, Southerners as of birth were assumed to be Irish without the need of a passport, the Nordies had to get the passport.
That never meant the British would respect it though. How many Northern Irish sports stars were always assumed to be British , even if they clearly were of the other tribe? Legally, it was still accurate. But, hey, the Brits took a long time to accept our country’s proper title in the English Language, always abusing the use of the term Éire. The previous citizenship regime sought to ensure that the British could not claim that Ireland was claiming them (that did not stop them however)
“So, the GFA actually never granted any special status to people from the north”
Kinda, yes. Most People up North could always get Irish Citizenship, but GFA says it is automatic. Remember the journalist Brian Kennan, EAST Belfast man. His Irish passport probably saved him from certain death when he was kidnapped in the Lebanon in 1986
As for people in the North renouncing their British Citizenship, hmm, be careful,until there is something set in ink, you would hardly want the British to treat you lot as Foreigners once they leave the UK
@Sally Aquilina: Under British, immigration law, it would have been more advantageous for this family if they could claim the Irish Nationality , even though they never left the UK and they would be considered British by British law.
Why?
British immigration law (non eu related cases) is strict with its conditions for British people to have their spouses live with them in the UK. Conditions of the earning of the sponsoring spouse (no different with Ireland) but they are pretty strict with non EU spouses if they are illegal. (Ireland , can be the same but they are more kinder)
Why claim to be Irish in UK? (or for a Nordie to claim they are British in the Republic ) EU law baby, the conditions are way way more liberal. Britain can’t consider the non EU spouse illegality if there is no sign of sham marriages and the sponsoring spouse does not need to show that they have X amount of money. The definition of a worker , in EU law, is very very wide.
British law is very unreasonable in some cases, like this .
so they are charging people £200 if they want to be identified as Irish but the journo still claims it’s false!?
@Ben Dunne: they are not charging any Irish citizen in northern Ireland anything to be Irish. They are charging if you want to waive your right to be a citizen of the UK. This is only an issue if you are looking to engage public UK immigration services available to UK citizens. The same applies to British citizens born in Ireland who wishes to use Irish immigration services to grant nationalisation to any other foreign citizen.
@Ben Dunne: No, they are not. The €200 charge is to renounce citizenship. That’s a personal choice, one they don’t have to make.
There’s nothing stopping anyone applying for Irish citizenship/passport and having both.
@Reuben Gray: The €200 is charged to renounce British Citizenship. Learn to read and comprehend (same goes for those who gave you the thumbs up) . It is indeed up to them if they want to be continue to be considered as British for reasons clearly explained by Ben Dunne .
“There’s nothing stopping anyone applying for Irish citizenship/passport and having both.”
Correct, but that is NOT the issue. Even in either case, they would still be considered British Citizens until they revoke same.
The issue, is , for the purpose of Directive 2004/38EC the European courts will not consider Duel Nationality. She will be deemed British, and she never actually left the UK, a requirement for the Directive. This is not my opinion, before you freak out, but the ruling of the European Court , in an almost identical case from 2011
I was born in county Down, I am as Irish as my children who were born in Dublin and if the Brittish government want 200£ of me to declare my self an Irish man they can whistle dixie! the stupid ignorant barstewards.
@Paul Mc: no one is doing this. Relax, your are Irish.
@Brin: wrong, they are saying you are British, a person born in Northern Ireland is always British unless you pay £200 to renounce. You can apply to be Irish but unless you pay you’re British first.
@Paul Mc: Ignorant? You would not be paying €200 to declare yourself an Irish man. Your Irish nationality is not the issue, you could be Mongolian for all that it matters. You would be paying €200 to declare that you no longer wish to be considered legally as a British Citizen, born and bred in the UK of GB and NI. You haven’t a clue how wrong you are ,lol.
Provisional SF caught out pushing untruths, am so surprised
@Stephen Kearon: Sure, they have to say something to stay relevant.
IT ALL ABOUT WHAT THE AGREEMENT BETWEEN BOTH GOVT SAY AND WHO IMPLEMENTS IT.
THE AGREEMENT BETWEEN BOTH SAY THAT UNTIL MAJ SAY OTHERWISE THAT N I REMAIN PART OF UK.
UNDER UK LEGISLATION IMPLEMENTING AGREEMENT THE DECISION ON WHEN. POLL BE CONDUCTED VEST IN SEC OF STATE
FF FG S F IF DAIL HAD MADE GOVT ACCOUNTABLE TO DAIL. HAD OPP TO SEEK AMMEND GIVING IRE INPUT INTO THE IMPLEMENTATION BUT LOST WITH AN EXIT CLAUSE.
@Mary Ward: Huh?
@Mary Ward: LOUD NOISES
@Mary Ward: You don’t need to shout. Jeeez
I was born in Tyrone in 1972. Moved South in 75. Got my first passport pre GFA. Form asked country of birth and county. I put Ireland and Tyrone. That’s what’s been on it ever since. No questions asked. The Brits are monetising the choice therefore blocking it
Yep..come Brexit Day the Euro Irish passport becomes useless for travel anywhere outside Ireland…can’t see USA security accepting them with NI addresses… keep them until the Six are reintegrated…
Thanks to TheJournal for this, I had completely misunderstood the outcome.
I think this fact check is asking the wrong question. While it is correct to say the UK isn’t taking away anyone’s right to Irish citizenship, the issue seems to be that they are claiming you have to give up British citizenship to do so, despite the fact that the UK accepts dual citizenship as a general right. (www.gov.uk/dual-citizenship).
So is the UK making up a special rule for NI? And if so, where is that reflected in law or regulation?
@David Paul Evans: The immigration case is NOT completely about what the British law or Irish immigration law thinks. She is relying on EU law. The EU law supports the British on this. EU law on this matter does not recognize duel nationality , especially in this scenario where the lady never left the UK
have your say