Abandoning the Referee Requirement for UK Citizenship Applications
Update by Leena Chouhan, Taylor Hampton Solicitors on the citizenship referee requirement.
This update discusses UK immigration rules for applicants needing assistance with immigration. Anyone applying for British citizenship must provide two referees who can vouch for their identity and character. However, this requirement feels increasingly out of place in today’s immigration system. It is particularly outdated because biometrics and extensive background checks already ensure rigorous identity verification. Thus the referee rule is not only passé , but also creates unnecessary barriers for applicants. So perhaps the time has come to reconsider whether it is still needed?
Why Are Referees Required?
The referee requirement has been part of British nationality law for decades. It is dating back to a time before modern identity verification methods. In the past, the government relied on personal endorsements to ensure applicants were who they claimed to be. Today, this system feels redundant and bureaucratic.
Modern immigration processes already involve multiple layers of biometric checks. For example, someone on the partner route to settlement will provide biometrics when applying for their visa overseas. They will do this again when extending their visa in the UK and once again when applying for settlement. At the naturalisation stage, they must enrol biometrics once more!
Given these extensive measures, it’s difficult to see how a fraudulent applicant could evade detection through the biometric system, only to be stopped by a referee requirement. Moreover, referees do not have to report concerns to the Home Office. Indeed, this is something which weakens the rule’s effectiveness even more.
Key Issues with the Citizenship Referee Requirement
The referee system creates significant challenges for applicants, often without adding any real value.
Class Bias in Acceptable Professions: One referee must belong to a “recognised profession” from a list dominated by middle-class roles, such as barristers, teachers, airline pilots, or surveyors. This requirement by its nature favours applicants with access to well-connected social networks.
For many people, meeting this demand is a challenge. For example, take an applicant who moved to the UK as a teenager and gained settlement after years of struggle with the Home Office. They may have no connections to professionals on this list and have no access to religious leaders, opticians, or MPs. Therefore this system inherently may disadvantage applicants who lack middle-class networks.
Challenges for Applicants Without Social Networks: Not everyone finds it easy to make and maintain the kinds of friendships required to meet the referee rules. Disabilities, frequent relocations, or challenging work environments can hinder the ability to form long-term personal relationships.
Even for applicants with suitable referees, some individuals may be reluctant to provide their personal details or interact with the government, especially given the declaration’s warnings of fines and prison sentences for false statements. These barriers make the process unnecessarily difficult for applicants who otherwise meet all the criteria for citizenship.
Unnecessary Bureaucracy for Applicants and Referees: The referee process adds a significant administrative burden. Applicants must:
- Identify two suitable referees
- Explain the requirements and gain their agreement
- Collect personal information such as addresses, passport numbers, and signatures
- Add a passport-style photo and send the declarations to the referees for completion
- Scan and upload these forms to the Home Office
For referees, the process can feel intrusive and time-consuming, particularly for overworked professionals like nurses and teachers. In fact, GPs successfully lobbied to be removed from the list of acceptable referees, citing the pressure they faced from patients.
Does the System Even Work?
There is little evidence that the referee system adds value to the citizenship process. A 2014 inspection by the Independent Chief Inspector of Borders and Immigration revealed that the Home Office rarely verifies referees or checks their suitability. Referees are almost never contacted, and there is no follow-up to ensure they meet the eligibility criteria.
This finding raises serious questions about why the referee requirement still exists. If referees are not actually checked, why maintain this outdated and burdensome rule?
Time for Change
The referee requirement no longer aligns with the realities of modern immigration. Biometrics already provide a highly reliable means of confirming identity, and police checks ensure applicants meet the “good character” requirement.
Removing the Citizenship Referee Requirement rule would simplify the application process for everyone involved. Applicants would face fewer barriers, referees would avoid unnecessary stress, and the Home Office could streamline its operations.
If the equally outdated police registration requirement could be abolished, there is no reason the referee rule should remain in place. Immigrants, their referees, and even Home Office staff would benefit from its removal. It’s time for the UK to modernise its citizenship application process and embrace a system that reflects the efficiencies of the 21st century.
For more information
If you would like to know more, please contact Leena Chouhan our Head of Immigration HERE:
or call 00442074275970
for Australian migration see HERE: