Chindamo and European citizenship
There have been some excellent and well-informed posts about this case already in the legal blogging world, notably at Nearly Legal, Head of Legal and the prolific Jailhouse Lawyer.
No-one has explained the rationale for why the relevant EC Directive — full title Directive 2004/38/EC on the right of citizens of the Union and their family members to move and reside freely within the territory of the Member States – makes it so hard for a member state to deport a criminal who has been resident for a long time, however. At first glance it may seem odd that even those who have committed the most serious violent, sexual and drugs related offences and are foreign nationals cannot be deported from the United Kingdom.
The reason is that the Directive in question, usually referred to as the Citizens’ Directive by immigration lawyers, was intended to be a significant step towards the creation of European Union citizenship. Before the Directive came into force in April 2006, rights of free movement flowed from economic activity. The cessation of economic activity or the termination of a familial link with an economically active person led to the cessation or termination of your free movement rights. In real terms, losing your job would eventually lead to a withdrawal of your right to reside in another member state, or divorce from your European spouse would leave you with no right to reside in the European country in which you had hitherto resided.
The latter caused particular hardship where the relationship broke down due to domestic violence or where the European spouse moved back to their home country and you wanted to stay put, for example in the UK.
The Directive went some way towards de-linking economic activity and free movement rights, although not as far as some would have wanted.
Where it was quite strong, though, was on protection from deportation. This is because the drafters of the Directive want a person from Birmingham living in London to be treated the same as a person from Berlin living in London. This is why the Directive enables family members to accompany European citizens when they move between member states, even if those family members are from a non-EU country. The right to move freely around Europe would be a mirage if a person could not take her family with her when making that move.
Similarly, if the Brummy commits a crime, he must serve his time and comply with any release or parole conditions, but will not be punished by being restricted to residence in Birmingham only, or exile somewhere new. Similarly, the Berliner will not be so treated. Both are European citizens, both have a right to reside in Europe, wherever they so choose.
The strongest level of protection, from which Chindamo benefits, only kicks in after ten years of residence, although it remains very difficult to deport EU citizens who have been resident for five to ten-years and just plain difficult to deport those who have been resident for less than five years.
We are still a LONG way from full European citizenship and complete freedom of movement, but the Directive was a step in the right direction. If you think that is the right direction, of course.
3 Responses to Chindamo and European citizenship
@freemvntblog
- Vintage Mash: May ‘thought illegal immigrants had tentacles’ thedailymash.co.uk/politics/polit… 11 hours ago
- Border hopefuls queueing long enough to gain citizenship thedailymash.co.uk/news/society/b… 11 hours ago
- Article 3 medical treatment cases are worth fighting, grim case of GS (India) overturned: freemovement.org.uk/2012/05/17/gs-… 17 hours ago
- RT @Paul_Dillane: New UKBA Operational Guidance Note on DRC. Section on returns of particular interest - bia.homeoffice.gov.uk/sitecontent/do… 1 day ago
- RT @Paul_Dillane: UKBA issue its first Operational Guidance Note on Gambia. Very helpful bia.homeoffice.gov.uk/sitecontent/do… 1 day ago
Immigration cases- R (on the application of SS)v London Borough of Croydon (AAJR) [2012] UKUT 139 (IAC) (16 May 2012) 16 May 2012
- R (on the application of ES) v London Borough of Hounslow (AAJR) [2012] UKUT 138 (IAC) (15 May 2012) 16 May 2012
- MK (documents - relocation) Iraq CG [2012] UKUT 126 (IAC) (25 April 2012) 14 May 2012
- Mumu (paragraph 320; Article 8; scope) Bangladesh [2012] UKUT 143 (IAC) (14 May 2012) 14 May 2012
- Ahmadi (s.47 decision: validity; Sapkota) Afghanistan [2012] UKUT 147 (IAC) (14 May 2012) 14 May 2012
- Buama (inter-country adoption - competent court) Ghana [2012] UKUT 146 (IAC) (14 May 2012) 14 May 2012
- Barnett and others (EEA Regulations: rights and documentation) Jamaica [2012] UKUT 142 (IAC) (14 May 2012) 14 May 2012
- LK (Somalia)), R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2012] EWHC 1229 (Admin) (10 May 2012) 10 May 2012
UK Border Agency- Removing full right of appeal for family visitors 10 May 2012
- Scrapping family visitor appeal rights will save millions 10 May 2012
- Service disruption at public enquiry offices 4 May 2012
- Child experts recruited to Family Returns Panel 25 April 2012
- Tier 2 certificates of sponsorship allocations for 2012/13 20 April 2012
Immigration news- Damian Green questioned by MPs over Heathrow delays: Politics live blog 18 May 2012
- In this week's New Statesman: European Crisis 17 May 2012
- New rules on overseas students 'will cost universities billions' 17 May 2012
- Dissenting Tories pushed out of backbench committee 17 May 2012
- Europe’s endgame 16 May 2012
Policy and research- Why asking the public to report irregular migrants to the UKBA is the wrong path to go down 17 May 2012
- "Home Office plans are too harsh" - Letter to the editor 16 May 2012
- Maps/Multimedia 16 May 2012
- Focus on Africa/Africans 16 May 2012
- Focus on Statelessness 15 May 2012
- The Free Movement blog is written mainly by barristers in the immigration team at Renaissance Chambers
Free email updates
Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog by email- or get a Kindle blog subscription
Blog topics
Latest from HJT Training
- Drafting a statement. Drafting representations. Completing a Notice of Appeal. Dont miss out on these topics! hjt-training.co.uk/venues/1855-92… 2 days ago
- New courses. New SRA regulations. Comply or get FINED! hjt-training.co.uk/services/immig… 3 days ago
- Employment Law: Age Discrimination and the effect of the decisions of the Supreme Court in Seldon and Homer hjt-training.co.uk/venues/1842-92… 1 week ago
- EU, Human Right and PBS Update - Book all 3 course for £300 - thats 9 CPD!! Great offer once again! 2 weeks ago
- OISC Level 1 Manchester now £180 + VAT offer ends 30th April hjt-training.co.uk/venues/1856-92… 3 weeks ago
Disclaimer
The information and commentary on this blog is provided free of charge for information purposes only. The information and commentary does not, and is not intended to, amount to legal advice to any person. Views expressed in blog posts are those of the author only, not Renaissance Chambers as a whole.












I wrote about some of the EU citizenship implications. Actually, the protection was pretty strong under Directive 64/221, in the sense that it required individualised consideration of the situation. The Citizens’ Rights directive does go further, but it’s more an incremental development of a combination of the previous law and the case law, plus the institution of the new right of permanent residence.
Thanks, Bondwoman. You are absolutely right, it was previously hard to deport EC nationals, but the new Directive takes it to a new level. One of the particularly interesting things to watch will be how the ECJ reconciles its previous ‘pro-citizenship’ case law with the new Directive, which is arguably less generous than ECJ case law in some areas.
I’ve added a link to your blog.
[...] by sketis on November 13th, 2007 Un “post” (sic!), adica mesagiu scris pe un blog merita citat aici. Omul descrie succint obiectivul [...]