Lord Templeman

My Lords,

For the reasons given by my noble and learned friend, Lord Slynn of Hadley I would dismiss both appeals and answer the certified question in the negative.

Lord Lowry

My Lords,

I have had the advantage of reading in draft the speech prepared by my noble and learned friend, Lord Slynn of Hadley. I agree with it and for the reasons which he gives I, too, would dismiss these appeals.

Lord Browne-Wilkinson

My Lords,

I have read the speech of my noble and learned friend Lord Slynn of Hadley.For the reasons which he gives, I too would dismiss both appeals.

Lord Slynn of Hadley

My Lords,

The Director of Public Prosecutions on behalf of the Crown Prosecution Service appeals against decisions of the Court of Appeal that Mr. Nailie and Mr. Kanesrajah (the first and second respondents) were not guilty of the offence of facilitating the illegal entry of persons into the United Kingdom contrary to s. 25 of the Immigration Act 1971. None of the persons involved was a patrial within the meaning of the Act. That section provides:

(1) Any person knowingly concerned in making or carrying out arrangements for securing or facilitating the entry into the United Kingdom of anyone whom he knows or has reasonable cause for believing to be an illegal entrant shall be guilty of an offence, ...

The facts in the two cases are quite distinct; the issue, however, is similar.The two cases were heard together both in the Court of Appeal ([1992] 1 WLR 1099) and before your Lordships' House and the question of law of general public importance raised in each case was certified by the Court of Appeal to be:

Whether a person seeking political asylum who disembarks from a ship or aircraft at a port in the United Kingdom without a valid passport or other document satisfactorily establishing his identity and nationality is on disembarkation an illegal entrant for the purposes of the Immigration Act 1971.

The facts of the two cases in summary are these.

(i) Mr. Nailie

On 3 March 1991 two Somali women and six chil- dren arrived at London Heathrow from Kenya via Muscat.Their passports were taken from them by aircrew who handed the documents to an immigration official at Heathrow.The women on interview by an immigration officer claimed political asylum.Each was served with a "Notice to Illegal Entrant" under the Act of 1971 but granted temporary admission into the United Kingdom.The passports were forged Tanzanian passports.

Enquiries revealed that Mr. Nailie had booked tickets for the whole group, relying on the forged Tanzanian passports for that purpose, on 1 March 1991.There was evidence that he had looked after the checking in of the whole group in Nairobi and that on part of the flight the whole group travelled together though Mr. Nailie denied this.

The jury found him guilty of the offence charged and he was sentenced to eighteen months' imprisonment.

(ii) Mr. Kanesrajah

This respondent flew to Sri Lanka on 9 March 1991 taking with him his wife's passport.He allowed that passport to be forged by the substitution for the original photograph of a photograph of a woman and child.On 25 April 1991 airline tickets were purchased for the respondent and three persons who were to travel on the same passport.All four boarded the aircraft and during the flight to London (via Dubai) Mr. Kanesrajah took the passport back.

The three persons on disembarkation claimed political asylum.They were not asked to produce passports and they did not claim that they or any of them were the persons named in the passport.On arrest Mr. Kanesrajah was found to be in possession of his wife's passport (as forged) and the travel documents issued to the three other travellers.On conviction by a jury he was sentenced to fifteen months' imprisonment.

The Court of Appeal following the decision of your Lordships' House in Reg. v. Secretary of State for the Home Department, Ex parte Khawaja [1984] AC 74 held that since there had been no attempt in either case by the other t