RFL09 - When can I refuse on character, conduct or associations - paragraph 320(19)?
This is internal guidance for use by entry clearance staff on the handling of refusals for visa applications made outside the United Kingdom (UK). It is a live document under constant review and is for information only.
On this page
RFL9.1 When can I refuse on character, conduct or associations - paragraph 320(19)?
Paragraphs 320(19) and S-EC.1.5. provide for a discretionary refusal of entry clearance on account of a person's conduct, character or associations. ECOs must be aware that there maybe more than one factor which would lead to the application being refused on character, conduct or associations grounds. While a person does not necessarily need to have been convicted of a criminal offence, the key to establishing refusal in this category will be the existence of reliable evidence necessary to support the decision that the person's behaviour calls into question their character and/or conduct and/or associations such that it makes it undesirable to grant them entry clearance.
A non-exhaustive list could include:
. Low-level criminal activity
. Association with known criminals
. Involvement with gangs
. Pending prosecutions
. Extradition requests
. Public Order risks
. Prescribed Organisations
. Unacceptable behaviours
. Subject to a travel ban
. War crimes
. Article 1F of the Refugee Convention
. Deliberate Debting
. Proceeds of crime and finances of questionable origins
. Corruption
. Relations between the UK and elsewhere
. Assisting in the invasion of the Immigration Control
. Hiring illegal workers
. Engaging in deceitful or dishonest dealings with Her Majesty's Government
For more information and guidance on this please see the General grounds for refusal page on this website.
RFL9.2 When do I refer 320 (19) cases to ECCCAT?
Any potential high profile non-conducive refusals, for example where media interest is likely, must always be referred to ECCCAT at as early a stage as possible.
For all IDENT1 and non-IDENT1 potential non-conducive refusals: refer to the ECM. If the ECM requires further guidance, then refer to ECCCAT.
Emails to ECCCAT should be classified as necessary and marked 'POSSIBLE NON-CONDUCIVE REFUSAL UNDER PARAGRAPH 320(19)'.
RFL9.3 Examples of when refusal under 320 (19) is appropriate
Examples of the types of cases where refusal under 320(19) may be appropriate include:
- where a person's admission could adversely affect the conduct of foreign policy;
- where the person's admission would be contrary to internationally agreed travel restrictions (for example, UN sanctions or EU measures) but the relevant Resolution or Common Position has not been designated under the Immigration (Designation of Travel Bans) Order 2000. If it has been designated under the Order, section 8B(1)(b) of the 1971 Act must be used to refuse LTE;
- the person is a threat to national security;
- there is reliable evidence the person has been involved in or otherwise associated with war crimes or crimes against humanity. It is not necessary for them to have been charged or convicted a person's admission might lead to an infringement of UK law or a breach of public order;
- a person's admission might lead to an offence being committed by someone else, for example, extreme views that if expressed may result in civil unrest resulting in an infringement of UK law.
When determining if a refusal under 320(19) is warranted the ECO must also take into account any human rights grounds and ensure that the refusal is both proportionate and reasonable.
RFL9.4 Refusal wordings
The ECO must not make reference to the details of the caution, reprimand, final warning or arrest in the refusal notice.
Please see guidance as noted above in RFL9.1
The ECO must ensure the refusal notice reflects the consideration they have given to the proportionality and impact of human rights considerations.