After Returning BRP Card

[kahaaf]

Hi Gurus,

Once i attended my Citizenship ceremony, i will be submitting my BRP Card,
it will take couple of weeks to get my passport, in emergency scenario if i have to travel abroad,
can i travel to abroad(India)?, with my indian passport?

How can i return back to uk in this case, gurus can some one shed light on this please

Regards,
Kahaaf

[CR001]

Yes you can leave the UK to travel. Difficult for you to come back though, airline won't allow you to travel without your BRP or visa in your passport. Suggest you apply for passport as soon as possible, current waiting times is 2-3 weeks.

[tamilmaran]

Hi Gurus,

Once i attended my Citizenship ceremony, i will be submitting my BRP Card,
it will take couple of weeks to get my passport, in emergency scenario if i have to travel abroad,
can i travel to abroad(India)?, with my indian passport?

How can i return back to uk in this case, gurus can some one shed light on this please

Regards,
Kahaaf

Once you attended the Citizenship ceremony, you become British and you not supposed to use another passport., but I found that you have to pay some fines to Indian Embassy when you surrender your passport. ( You have to submit your letter when you got your Naturalization )

" Return back " typical Indian English. . It would be problem for you. That is why Home office is also enforcing the control that you have to submitt within 5 days.

I would advice you to take your British passport and OCI card as a permanent solution .

[CR001]

The poster has 90 days grace period within which to use his Indian passport without penalties. Please do not give incorrect advice.

you become British and you not supposed to use another passport.,

Your statement above is not correct. It is not compulsory to hold a British Passport, many British born citizens don't have passports.

" Return back " typical Indian English.

Please be a bit more respectful of posters foreign nationality. We do not tolerate this type of comment on the forum.

[ouflak1]

Once you attended the Citizenship ceremony, you become British and you not supposed to use another passport.,

Hate to pile on, but I do think this point needs to be illuminated. The United Kingdom does not have any prohibition against its own citizens using other passports as they see fit or as they need. The only requirement is that when a British citizen enters the United Kingdom, they should use their British passport. And there are several cases on this forum where even that has not always been strictly enforced (such as people entering on passports with their old ILR). Also to mention, no citizen can be denied entry into their own country. This is part of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights to which the UK is a signatory.

[tamilmaran]

The poster has 90 days grace period within which to use his Indian passport without penalties. Please do not give incorrect advice.

you become British and you not supposed to use another passport.,

Your statement above is not correct. It is not compulsory to hold a British Passport, many British born citizens don't have passports.

" Return back " typical Indian English.

Please be a bit more respectful of posters foreign nationality. We do not tolerate this type of comment on the forum.

Hi.
I am so sorry, I did not intent to hurt anyone. I am from India and even I did the same mistake....

[ohara]

The only requirement is that when a British citizen enters the United Kingdom, they should use their British passport.

It this true

I'm sure mods/gurus have previously stated it is not the case in the UK (as it is in the USA for example). The consensus was that the UK does not care which passport you use to enter the country, even if you do hold a British passport.

[ouflak1]

The only requirement is that when a British citizen enters the United Kingdom, they should use their British passport.

It this true

I'm sure mods/gurus have previously stated it is not the case in the UK (as it is in the USA for example).

No country can deny their own citizens entry. Even for the U.S., it will incur a load of checks where the citizen may have to wait for hours, but they must be allowed in at a port of entry. There is not punitive measure at all. Nevertheless, the token requirement exists.

The consensus was that the UK does not care which passport you use to enter the country, even if you do hold a British passport.

Every country in the world with a controlled border cares about who enters the country. But no country can deny entry to its own citizens, so even if you are not holding any passport at all, if they can do the checks to prove an entrant's claim to citizenship, they must be allowed if that claim is true.

NOTE: There are countries in the world that are not signatories to the UDHR. Some of these countries will and do deny entry of their citizens (Guantanamo Bay prisoners for example).

[Richard W]

Also to mention, no citizen can be denied entry into their own country. This is part of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights to which the UK is a signatory.

What about CUKCs who didn't qualify for entry to the United Kingdom?

It's a criminal offence for a British citizen subject to a temporary exclusion order to enter the UK without an appointment.

Under the Immigration Act 1971, a claim of British citizenship has to be proven using a passport. Or is this not an exception, because passportless citizens only lack the right to enter at ports? Fortunately, the Instructions are more lenient.

[ouflak1]

Also to mention, no citizen can be denied entry into their own country. This is part of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights to which the UK is a signatory.

What about CUKCs who didn't qualify for entry to the United Kingdom?

It's a criminal offence for a British citizen subject to a temporary exclusion order to enter the UK without an appointment.

The UDHR does not preclude specific instances of criminal behavior (where someone may have effectively forsaken their rights by their actions) or other decisions a nation might make to protect itself from obviously destructive elements. Also, subjects, nationals, permanent residents, etc... and others who are not citizens of the country in question are not covered, or even mentioned, in the UDHR with regards to entry/leaving the respective country.

Under the Immigration Act 1971, a claim of British citizenship has to be proven using a passport.

No.

Part 1 (3)(3)(a - e):
A person seeking to enter the United Kingdom and claiming to have the right of abode there shall prove it by means of-

• * (a)a United Kingdom passport describing him as a British citizen,
  
  * (b)a United Kingdom passport describing him as a British subject with the right of abode in the United Kingdom,
  
  * (c)an ID card issued under the Identity Cards Act 2006 describing him as a British citizen,
  
  * (d)an ID card issued under that Act describing him as a British subject with the right of abode in the United Kingdom, or
  
  * (e)a certificate of entitlement

That's it. No other mention of passports and citizenship. If you think about it, it makes sense that no citizen needs a passport. Some citizens will live their whole life in the UK and never leave it. Other people may hold a British passport but not necessarily be citizens.

Or is this not an exception, because passportless citizens only lack the right to enter at ports?

'Passportless' citizens have the right to enter their own country regardless of the port of entry. We are required to enter using a passport for the UK (and for the U.S. and probably many other countries), but there is no punitive measure associated with this requirement and you will at worst incur delays while your right to entry as a citizen is verified.

[Richard W]

Or is this not an exception, because passportless citizens only lack the right to enter at ports?

'Passportless' citizens have the right to enter their own country regardless of the port of entry. We are required to enter using a passport for the UK (and for the U.S. and probably many other countries), but there is no punitive measure associated with this requirement and you will at worst incur delays while your right to entry as a citizen is verified.

That's a concession. There's no right for someone who can prove they're British to enter at a port on the basis of being British if they don't have the right documents. Chapter 1 Section 1 (right of Abode) of the Immigration Directorate Instructions make chilling reading. According to that, if one lacks the requisite documents, one cannot be admitted for the purpose of settlement.

However, if not the subject of a temporary exclusion order, a British citizen can just row ashore at an ordinary beach in an inflatable dinghy, pick it up, and walk inland, regardless of whether he has the prescribed evidence of right of abode.

[ouflak1]

Or is this not an exception, because passportless citizens only lack the right to enter at ports?

'Passportless' citizens have the right to enter their own country regardless of the port of entry. We are required to enter using a passport for the UK (and for the U.S. and probably many other countries), but there is no punitive measure associated with this requirement and you will at worst incur delays while your right to entry as a citizen is verified.

That's a concession. There's no right for someone who can prove they're British to enter at a port on the basis of being British if they don't have the right documents.

Article 13 (2):
Everyone has the right to leave any country, including his own, and to return to his country.

The United Kingdom was one of the draftee countries that also ratified that declaration in 1948.

Chapter 1 Section 1 (right of Abode) of the Immigration Directorate Instructions make chilling reading.

Right of Abode does not mean citizenship nor is it exclusive to citizens. There are several classes of people who qualify for it.

According to that, if one lacks the requisite documents, one cannot be admitted for the purpose of settlement.

A citizen does not need to bother about such concepts as 'settlement'. That is an inherent quality of being a citizen of a country.

However, if not the subject of a temporary exclusion order, a British citizen can just row ashore at an ordinary beach in an inflatable dinghy, pick it up, and walk inland, regardless of whether he has the prescribed evidence of right of abode.

True. But a citizen so described can also enter at any controlled port as well. There will just be a lot more hassle and delay as their citizenship is verified.

[Richard W]

Chapter 1 Section 1 (right of Abode) of the Immigration Directorate Instructions make chilling reading.

Right of Abode does not mean citizenship nor is it exclusive to citizens. There are several classes of people who qualify for it.

No, but having right of abode is what makes British citizenship relevant to entering the UK.

According to that, if one lacks the requisite documents, one cannot be admitted for the purpose of settlement.

A citizen does not need to bother about such concepts as 'settlement'. That is an inherent quality of being a citizen of a country.

A British (or Irish) citizen outside the UK is not necessarily settled in the UK. The magic quality is that he becomes settled when he enters the UK.

[ouflak1]

Chapter 1 Section 1 (right of Abode) of the Immigration Directorate Instructions make chilling reading.

Right of Abode does not mean citizenship nor is it exclusive to citizens. There are several classes of people who qualify for it.

No, but having right of abode is what makes British citizenship relevant to entering the UK.

Almost. Having the fundamental human right of being able to enter the country of one's own citizenship is what makes British citizenship relevant to entering the UK. Right of Abode is merely a particular designation that the UK employs for some people to establish their ability to enter and remain into the UK. The UK could abolish that program tomorrow, but the right of a citizen to enter their country, including the right of British citizen to enter the UK, would still remain unchanged.

According to that, if one lacks the requisite documents, one cannot be admitted for the purpose of settlement.

A citizen does not need to bother about such concepts as 'settlement'. That is an inherent quality of being a citizen of a country.

A British (or Irish) citizen outside the UK is not necessarily settled in the UK. The magic quality is that he becomes settled when he enters the UK.

I worded that confusingly earlier. It is more accurate to say that the concept of being 'settled' has nothing to do with citizenship. It is inherent in the nature of being a citizen that they may enter (or leave) their own country as they see fit, whether or not they are settled. I did not mean to imply that settlement itself is directly a quality of being a citizen. It most certainly is not. You can be a citizen and never be settled in that country of citizenship (depending on the laws of the country, perhaps indefinitely). In the UK in particular, non-settled citizens may have to pay full NHS fees and will be charged international education fees. But they cannot be prevented from entering their own country (except in those obvious where they have forsaken their natural by their own actions).