CANCELLATION SOUGHT

Poverty Bay Herald, Volume LX, Issue 18191, 12 September 1933, Page 9

CANCELLATION SOUGHT

NATURALISATION PAPERS o' UGO-SI;AV ’S ACTIVITIES DISLOYALTY ALLEGED (l’er Tress Association.) AUCKLAND, lost night. An application of an unusual kind was made in the Supreme Court on behalf of the Minister of Internal Affairs, when Mr. Justice Herdman was asked to rev >ke the naturalisation papers granted in 1926 to a Jugo-Slav, Ivan Toinasevie. The application was based on allegations of disloyalty and disaffection made against Ton asevic.

Mr. V. N. Hubble appeared in support, of tho Minister's application which, he said, was the first proceeding brought before the court in New Zealand under the British Nationality and Status of Aliens (in New Zealand) Act of 1928. The defendant, Tomascvic, came forward and said that he had been advised not to go into the, box and give evidence. He was opposing the Crown’s application to revoke his certificate of naturalisation.

Mr. Hubble said that the Act under which the proceedings were taken provided that the British Act dealing with naturalisation should be adopted in New Zealand. On November 11, 1926, the defendant was naturalised in New Zealand under the Act then in force, which corresponded with the existing Act. The British Act provided that the Secretary of State could revoke the certificate of naturalisation of a person “who had shown himself by act or speech disaffected or disloyal to His Majesty.” The Supremo Court, in accordance with the English Act, had power to cancel the certificate of naturalisation. OATH OF ALLEGIANCE Continuing, Mr. Hubble said that after the defendant had been naturalised lie took a leadig part in Communistic activities among Jugo-Slavs in Auckland. In a raid on Communist headquarters at 166 Vivian street, Wellington, on April 21, 1931, quantities of literature and correspondence were found. This showed that the defendant was enrolled as a member of the Communist Party, and correspondence would be produced showing that he took an active part in the organisation, and in obtaining) copies of the Red Worker and a pamphlet called The Swindle. He had been seen by police officers in company with Communists, and addressing Communists. The literature of the party showed clearly that its aims were such that an active member could not really be a loyal and good subject of the King. Tho grant of naturalisation was not a right, but was in the discretion of the Minister, continued Mr. Hubble. The defendant had taken the oath of allegiance, but his activities had been such that tho only inference was that he was not loyal. The Grown said that the defendant had claimed the special privileges attaching to British citizenship, and he had adopted a line of conduct that showed that he was not adhering to his oath of allegiance. He could not be loyal both to the Communist Party and to the Crown. The literature to be produced undoubtedly tended to promote a feeling of ill-will and discontent, and some of the papers deliberately incited to violence. The Crown did not go the length of proving sedition, but it proved disaffection and disloyalty. 1 Police evidence was given on fbe lines of Mr. Hubble’s statement and numerous documents were produced. The hearing was then adjourned.