TOUGHER IMMIGRATION rules in the United Kingdom, which require people to be able to speak English before they arrive in the country, are lawful, the High Court decided yesterday in what is seen as a major victory for the British government’s efforts to cut numbers.
In his judgment, Mr Justice Beatson said the rules announced by home secretary Theresa May in June 2010 did not interfere with the human rights of three Indian couples who had brought the challenge.
The lead couple in the case, British citizen Rashida Chapti (54) and her husband, Vali (57), have been married for 37 years and have six children, though they have spent much time apart over the last 15 years as Ms Chapti travelled between Leicester and her home in India.
The couple’s application for a visa for Mr Chapti was previously rejected by an immigration tribunal, on the grounds of age, lack of skills, his inability to speak English at all, but also because Ms Chapti could not prove she had the income to support them both.
The judge acknowledged that the immigration curbs interfered with the couple’s right under Article 8 of the Human Rights Act to a family life but this was justified in the interests of promoting integration and protecting public services.
“Taking into account all the material before the court, in particular the exceptions to it, the new rule is not a disproportionate interference with family life and is justified,” Mr Justice Beatson said in a ruling delivered in Birmingham.
Welcoming the decision, immigration minister Damian Green said: “We believe it is entirely reasonable that someone intending to live in the UK should understand English, so that they can integrate and participate fully in our society.”
The language tests will apply to people coming from non-English-speaking countries.
The top five nationalities of those coming to marry UK citizens are Pakistan (8,570 people), India (5,110), Bangladesh (2,780), US (2,110) and Thailand, with 1,776 applications.
The High Court’s ruling, which will be appealed, is a major victory for the home secretary, who wants to cut immigration numbers, but also wants judges to take a less-liberal attitude to Article 8 cases.
Hina Majid, the legal director of the Joint Council for the Welfare of Immigrants, which helped the couples to take the case, said “no one in their right mind would pretend that learning English is not a good thing for immigrants in the UK to do”.
However, she warned that the ruling would “mean that many British citizens will continue to experience enforced and indefinite separation from loved ones, partners and, in some cases, their children”.
