The High Court has refused Senad Hodzic’s challenge to the Minister for Justice’s refusal of his naturalisation application, finding that an earlier letter saying the application had been approved was not a final grant of citizenship.
In a judgment delivered on 13 July 2010, Mr Justice Birmingham said the Minister could grant a certificate only after all statutory conditions were met, including a declaration of fidelity to the State. Hodzic made that declaration on 7 May 2009, but the Minister had refused the application on 28 April, after receiving further information about his record.
A letter sent to Hodzic’s solicitor on 17 February 2009 said the application had been approved and that a formal certificate should issue in due course. The judge said the letter created a misleading impression. At that point Hodzic had not made the required declaration, so the Minister was not legally in a position to grant the certificate. The earlier communication could, at most, indicate an intention to grant it once the conditions were satisfied.
The judgment recounts that a departmental recommendation initially supported naturalisation despite an earlier assault causing harm conviction dealt with under the Probation Act. A later recommendation urged refusal after the Garda reported further matters, including two drunk-driving cases. One resulted in a €250 fine and a one-year driving disqualification in March 2007. The second resulted in a conviction on 19 April 2009, with a €1,000 fine and a four-year disqualification. Other listed charges had resulted in non-convictions when cases were not called.
Hod zic argued that the Minister had already exercised the statutory discretion once, that reversing course was unreasonable, and that the approval letter created a legitimate expectation that a certificate would follow. The Minister’s counsel argued that the earlier position was provisional because the statutory declaration had not yet been made, and that new information had arrived before the process was complete.
The judge concluded the Minister had exercised the discretion only once, when refusing the application. He said the Minister could take account of updated information and that the court could not compel the grant of citizenship on the basis of an earlier indication made without complete information. The judgment also noted the Minister’s broad statutory discretion and that citizenship was not an entitlement.
The court declined the relief sought, including declarations that the earlier approval was final, that the refusal was invalid, and that the Minister should issue a certificate. It did not grant naturalisation or direct the Minister to reconsider the application.