WALLESS successfully protected client’s rights in a citizenship case before the Supreme Court

WALLESS Senior Associates Piret Kergandberg and Mariliis Timmermann represent a client who is at risk of losing their Estonian citizenship. However, the Supreme Court considered the appeal against the prohibition to be justified.
What happened?
• The Administrative Court and the Circuit Court had previously dismissed the client’s appeal against the Police and Border Guard Board, finding that rights can only be protected after the citizenship has been revoked.
• The Supreme Court applied preliminary legal protection and disagreed with the lower courts, which had not allowed the appeal to be heard.
• The case will now go back to the Administrative Court, where the appeal will be reviewed on its merits.
• The court will decide whether the Police and Border Guard Board has the right to revoke citizenship in this case.

Why is this important?
• The Supreme Court agreed that revoking citizenship is not a normal administrative act – without valid documents, a person would be unable to use e-services, banking services, vote, etc. Citizenship is a permanent bond between the state and the individual, which deserves uninterrupted protection and justifies the processing of a rather rare appeal against a prohibition.
“Although this is only a partial victory and the road ahead is still long, we are proud that we were able to protect our client’s fundamental right to effective judicial protection and that the Supreme Court shared our position.”