Nsungani v The Minister for Justice and Equality

• Jurisdiction: Ireland
• Judge: Mr Justice Max Barrett
• Judgment Date: 21 December 2018
• Neutral Citation: [2018] IEHC 758
• Docket Number: 2018 No. 389 JR
• Court: High Court
• Date: 21 December 2018

[2018] IEHC 758

THE HIGH COURT

Barrett J.

2018 No. 389 JR

Between:

MIGUEL NKOLOVATA NSUNGANI

Applicant

– and –

MINISTER FOR JUSTICE AND EQUALITY

Respondent

Naturalisation – Certiorari – EU law – Applicant seeking an order of certiorari – Whether EU law was engaged in the applicant’s naturalisation application

Facts: The application of the applicant, Mr Nsungani, for naturalisation was refused by the respondent, the Minister for Justice and Equality. Mr Nsungani applied to the High Court seeking an order of certiorari as well as certain declarations and other reliefs. Mr Nsungani claimed that: (1) EU law was engaged in his naturalisation application; (2) his submissions of 06.11.2017 were not considered; (3) the naturalisation process breached Art. 6 and/or 8 ECHR.

Held by Barrett J that AA (Algeria) v Minister for Justice and Equality [2016] IEHC 416, AMA v Minister for Justice and Equality [2016] IEHC 466 and AA v Minister for Justice and Equality [2017] IEHC 491 show that the court is limited to reviewing whether the Minister acted arbitrarily/capriciously/autocratically in reaching his conclusions or in the conclusions reached. Barrett J held that the Minister had not so acted. The court considered that proportionality plays a part in the Minister’s exercise of his discretion (e.g., in distinguishing between the differing seriousness of different criminal behaviours); in any one case a want in proportionality might conceivably impact on the issue of whether the Minister acted arbitrarily/capriciously/autocratically. Barrett j held that in this case no such want was evidenced or presented. As for Mr Nsungani’s claims, Barrett J held that: (1) Cooke J in Mallak v Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform [2011] IEHC 306, para. 24 indicated that acquisition of national citizenship is a sovereign matter for Member States, so EU law was not engaged; (2) a senior department official had averred that Mr Nsungani’s submissions were considered and that following consideration his view was that the recommendation to refuse should stay as was, which averments had not been controverted; (3) no such breach of Art. 6 and/or 8 ECHR presented.

Barrett J held that all the reliefs sought by Mr Nsungani would be refused.

Reliefs refused.

JUDGMENT of Mr Justice Max Barrett dated 21st December, 2018.

1 Mr Nsungani's naturalisation application has been refused by the Minister. Under s.15 of the Irish Nationality...