Complex (maybe?)/Odd situation... Visa

[ubugger]

Hi All,

I've read through the UK visa sites (and australian sites too) so many times my eyes are bleeding!

My basic story goes like:
My grandpa was born in Kenya in 1914 - His parents (at least his mother, we don't know anything about his father) was born in India (Damon? 1882)... We are fairly certain that Grandpa has/used to work for the British government in india/afghanistan at certain stages, even the BBC at once stage. (I am still fairly sure he was a british citizen, *somehow*)
My dad was born in Bombay, India, 1952, and they all immigrated to Australia in 1963.
As for birth certificates (god knows!) I dont' have them, neither do they. Records is the last of my worries at this stage!

The reason I want to go to the UK is to travel and work over several years, as I want to travel to the UK, then to europe, then back ot the UK, obviously the working holiday visa doesn't cover these time periods. Can anyone help? I was looking at ancestory visa as the most likely option. Grandpa was very anti-indian for some reason - So they left in '63 when indian became complusary in schooling. (So i'm told).
As I understand they are all australian citizens now (grandpa gets the pension)...... Dad's only 'evidence' of birth he has was a baptism certificate (!), and that's it!

Can anyone help with info?

Much appreciated,
Thanks
Aaron

[JAJ]

My basic story goes like:
My grandpa was born in Kenya in 1914 - His parents (at least his mother, we don't know anything about his father) was born in India (Damon? 1882)... We are fairly certain that Grandpa has/used to work for the British government in india/afghanistan at certain stages, even the BBC at once stage. (I am still fairly sure he was a british citizen, *somehow*)
My dad was born in Bombay, India, 1952, and they all immigrated to Australia in 1963.

As a person born in Kenya in 1914, your grandfather was British by birth. He became a Citizen of the UK & Colonies (CUKC) on 1 January 1949. Most likely, he would have retained CUKC status on Kenya independence in 1963.

HOWEVER, without ties of descent or residence to the UK, he would not have become a British citizen on 1 January 1983. Instead, he would have become a British Overseas citizen.

Your father was born a CUKC by descent assuming your parents were married. Again, on 1 January 1983, he would have become a British Overseas citizen.

British Overseas citizenship doesn't give a right to live in the UK. In 2003, a right was introduced for British Overseas citizens with no other nationality as of 4 July 2002 to register as British citizens. Assuming your father and grandfather became Australian citizens before then, they have no claim to register as British citizens. A British Overseas passport doesn't give them any substantive extra rights in the UK compared to an Australian passport.

You have no claim to British nationality, I'm sorry to say. And the ancestry visa doesn't work either - you need a grandparent born in the United Kingdom, Channel Islands or Isle of Man. Birth in Kenya doesn't count under any circumstances.

[ubugger]

Does it matter that he may have worked for the british government, i.e. maybe he was a genuine british citizen (i.e. not born there, but he had to take it up to work for them?) I think this happened about 1930's sometime...

Thanks for the help,

Aaron

[JAJ]

Does it matter that he may have worked for the british government, i.e. maybe he was a genuine british citizen (i.e. not born there, but he had to take it up to work for them?) I think this happened about 1930's sometime...

For the ancestry visa, that makes no difference.

[ubugger]

Does it matter that he may have worked for the british government, i.e. maybe he was a genuine british citizen (i.e. not born there, but he had to take it up to work for them?) I think this happened about 1930's sometime...

For the ancestry visa, that makes no difference.

Damn. Ok, I'll give up then!
Thanks

[ppron747]

As a person born in Kenya in 1914, your grandfather was British by birth. He became a Citizen of the UK & Colonies (CUKC) on 1 January 1949....

No help whatsoever to "ubugger", but in fact Kenya Colony wasn't founded until July 1920, so it's not clear that his grandfather would even have been a British subject - unless he could show legitimate descent from a BS father...

[ubugger]

As a person born in Kenya in 1914, your grandfather was British by birth. He became a Citizen of the UK & Colonies (CUKC) on 1 January 1949....

No help whatsoever to "ubugger", but in fact Kenya Colony wasn't founded until July 1920, so it's not clear that his grandfather would even have been a British subject - unless he could show legitimate descent from a BS father...

From what I was told by the Kenyan consulate today here in Australia was that people born in Kenya (even in those days) assumed the nationality of their parents, not of Kenya. So that would mean his parents (at least one was born in india) would have to have been english... Funny enough, my surname is an evolution of "Smith".... Which is highly odd for an indian I would have thought!

Thanks
Aaron
P.S. I've got a VERY mixed background!

[ppron747]

From what I was told by the Kenyan consulate today here in Australia was that people born in Kenya (even in those days) assumed the nationality of their parents, not of Kenya. So that would mean his parents (at least one was born in india) would have to have been english...

British - not English...
And that would apply only if your great-grandfather was born in British India - there were between six and seven hundred Indian Princely (or "Native") States, which were not British territory, and people born in one of those states were not British subjects by birth.

[ubugger]

British - not English...
And that would apply only if your great-grandfather was born in British India - there were between six and seven hundred Indian Princely (or "Native") States, which were not British territory, and people born in one of those states were not British subjects by birth.

Oops, that's what I meant!! British. Let's just say the surname is "very" Irish or British, it's a hyphenated surname... And I don't know how common it is in Ireland, but the only other person i've found with this surname is in Ireland.
My great grandfather was a Treasury Officer in - I believe - Kenya. I am sure he was in 1914 anyway.
I've decided after looking into this, that i might try and document a full family history (hard when the information is largely memory, and their memory isn't good!). But i'm going to start with the assumption that they were registered as born in british colony, or something of the like, then they can start the search there.
I'm going to have to give up on ancestry visa, as it's obviously not possible by the sound of it... However my family history is crazy. The lived in Kenya, Afghansitan and also India... That was in 20 years too, so they moved about, especially for those days!
Thanks everyone!

Aaron

[JAJ]

No help whatsoever to "ubugger", but in fact Kenya Colony wasn't founded until July 1920, so it's not clear that his grandfather would even have been a British subject

I had assumed that there would have been provisions to give British subject status to persons already born in a newly acquired colony (eg the annexation provisions), but a read of the Nationality Instructions suggests not.

The Nationality Instructions do contain a list of when places ceased to be a colony (from 1949) - is there a list anywhere that shows when different jurisdictions became colonies?

[ppron747]

Not that I've found online, I'm afraid - I tend to use Fransman's and my own hotch potch of notes.

Incidentally, I wasn't intending to suggest that someone born in the East African Protectorate in 1914 couldn't be a BS - merely that it wasn't clear that he would be one. I don't know what would have happened to someone born in the former protectorate when it became a colony, tbh - I haven't got much of my stuff with me on this trip.

The sequence of events, AIUI, was that more or less the whole of modern day Kenya formed "the East African Protectorate" from the 1890s, starting with the coastal strip, then with the rest of the country added to it. In 1920 the main body of the country became Kenya Colony and the coastal area was renamed Kenya Protectorate the following year. And that's how it remained until 12.12.63, when the two territories became the independent Commonwealth country, Kenya.

[JAJ]

From what I was told by the Kenyan consulate today here in Australia was that people born in Kenya (even in those days) assumed the nationality of their parents, not of Kenya. So that would mean his parents (at least one was born in india) would have to have been english.

There was no such thing as a Kenyan citizen before 12 December 1963. Any person born in the Colony of Kenya (other than diplomats) definitely acquired Citizenship of the UK & Colonies at birth (CUKC).

So it's not clear why the consulate sees fit to comment on the law as it predated independence.

At independence, many Kenyan CUKCs were deemed to be insufficiently "African" to become Kenyan citizens. Hence they retained their CUKC status at independence. Over time, many of them migrated to the UK and became British citizens in 1983. Those who remained in Kenya and did not have any ties to the UK itself became British Overseas citizens, as did their children born between independence and 31 December 1982.

Since 2003 these British Overseas citizens have been able to register as British citizens if they do not have any other citizenship and have not lost/renounced any other citizenship after 4 July 2002.

After independence, Kenyan citizenship was acquired if a person was born in Kenya and one parent is Kenyan, as far as I understand. A Kenyan citizen who has another citizenship at birth automatically loses Kenyan citizenship at age 23 if he or she has not renounced (formally) the other citizenship by then.

[ppron747]

From what I was told by the Kenyan consulate today here in Australia was that people born in Kenya (even in those days) assumed the nationality of their parents, not of Kenya. So that would mean his parents (at least one was born in india) would have to have been english.

There was no such thing as a Kenyan citizen before 12 December 1963. Any person born in the Colony of Kenya (other than diplomats) definitely acquired Citizenship of the UK & Colonies at birth (CUKC).

So it's not clear why the consulate sees fit to comment on the law as it predated independence.

My own view is that, given that an ancient claim to British nationality can in certain circumstances give a person a claim to Kenyan citizenship, the Kenyan Consulate has every right to comment on previous laws.

In fact, their view of the pre-colonial position is not wrong. There was no citizenship law in place in many protetectorates, and the status of British Protected person - which isn't a citizenship - was, in those days, granted under the Royal Prerogative. That is it was granted to those people who the British government thought it appropriate to protect - usually only those who were regarded as subjects of the local ruler. In the case of Kenya, I believe this was the Sultan of Zanzibar, whose roots lay in the Gulf. It is therefore true to say that someone born to parents who were not subjects of the Sultan would not have been a BPP. So the question as to whether he/she would have acquired a citizenship would have depended entirely on whether one or other of his parents were in a position to transmit one...

Later on, when the concept of "statutory BPP" was introduced, people automaticallly became BPPs simply by being born in a particular place, regardless of their allegiance, but this didn't happen until 1949.