Regardless of what anyone’s views on her being allowed back in or not, the truth is it sets a dangerous precedent with regards to stripping people of their citizenship.
Shamima Begum, IS teen wants to come back to the UK
- Thread starter Tommy
- Start date
She should be tried by the Yazidis first. She did this in Syria afterall.
This context: https://www.ohchr.org/en/nationality-and-statelessness
British citizens have a right to enter Britain, so the UK government decided to say feck off to human rights and make Begum stateless. If you think people should have certain rights unless they do bad things, then no, you're not all for human rights.
Then you’re not really for human rights. She shouldn’t be welcomed back but she was a British citizen and should answer for her crimes here rather than chucking her onto someone else.
What you and I believe is likely or not likely in terms of her risk to the UK is not relevant as we are not in full receipt of the facts in the way that the security services are. If they believe letting this lady back into the country would be a high security risk then I'm not going to challenge it because they will know things I am not aware of.
Shamima Begum - latest: Why ruling IS bride cannot return to UK is 'surprising'
Shamima Begum has lost an appeal against the decision to remove her British citizenship. She travelled to Syria to join the Islamic State eight years ago at the age of 15 and remains there in a refugee camp.
'Legal fight nowhere near over' - Begum's lawyer
Shamima Begum's legal fight is "nowhere near over", one of her lawyers says.
Speaking after the Special Immigration Appeals Commission's ruling, Daniel Furner says the 23-year-old's legal team are going to challenge the decision.
"We're not going to go into details about exactly what that means at this stage," he adds.
His colleague, Gareth Pierce, adds that "there's no limit to the challenges" that can be undertaken.
Begum's team also calls on the home secretary to use "courage and some leadership" to look at the IS bride's case in "the light of the clear and compelling factual findings" made by the court.
Ms Pierce criticises today's decision has left "no protection for a British child trafficked out of the UK".
"Regrettably, this is a lost opportunity to put into reverse a profound mistake and a continuing injustice," she says.
"Ms Begum remains in unlawful, arbitrary and indefinite detention without trial in a Syrian camp. Every possible avenue to challenge this decision will be urgently pursued."
Why the decision is surprising...
Shamima Begum has lost her appeal to return to the UK.
She is living in a refugee camp in northern Syria, and the decision essentially leaves her stateless.
Sky News correspondent Alistair Bunkall says the ruling is quite surprising.
"The security that I spoke to ahead of the ruling did feel that probably she would have her British nationality restored because the feeling was that perhaps it was legally untenable to keep it revoked.
"So I think in that respect it is a surprise.
"When I interviewed her, I did ask her about this eventuality and what would happen if she didn't have her passport returned to her and her nationality given back, and she said there is no plan B.
"The British government argument would be that the plan for her is to pursue the route through Bangladesh.
"Her father has some Bangladesh heritage, and that is why the British government argued that they are in a position to revoke her British nationality.
"Shamima Begum's counterargument is that she's never been to Bangladesh all she has no links with Bangladesh and if she went back there then she could possibly face the death penalty."
Shamima Begum - latest: Why ruling IS bride cannot return to UK is 'surprising' | UK News | Sky News
This is really pathetic stuff from the UK government & legal system.
Shamima Begum has lost an appeal against the decision to remove her British citizenship. She travelled to Syria to join the Islamic State eight years ago at the age of 15 and remains there in a refugee camp.
'Legal fight nowhere near over' - Begum's lawyer
Shamima Begum's legal fight is "nowhere near over", one of her lawyers says.
Speaking after the Special Immigration Appeals Commission's ruling, Daniel Furner says the 23-year-old's legal team are going to challenge the decision.
"We're not going to go into details about exactly what that means at this stage," he adds.
His colleague, Gareth Pierce, adds that "there's no limit to the challenges" that can be undertaken.
Begum's team also calls on the home secretary to use "courage and some leadership" to look at the IS bride's case in "the light of the clear and compelling factual findings" made by the court.
Ms Pierce criticises today's decision has left "no protection for a British child trafficked out of the UK".
"Regrettably, this is a lost opportunity to put into reverse a profound mistake and a continuing injustice," she says.
"Ms Begum remains in unlawful, arbitrary and indefinite detention without trial in a Syrian camp. Every possible avenue to challenge this decision will be urgently pursued."
Why the decision is surprising...
Shamima Begum has lost her appeal to return to the UK.
She is living in a refugee camp in northern Syria, and the decision essentially leaves her stateless.
Sky News correspondent Alistair Bunkall says the ruling is quite surprising.
"The security that I spoke to ahead of the ruling did feel that probably she would have her British nationality restored because the feeling was that perhaps it was legally untenable to keep it revoked.
"So I think in that respect it is a surprise.
"When I interviewed her, I did ask her about this eventuality and what would happen if she didn't have her passport returned to her and her nationality given back, and she said there is no plan B.
"The British government argument would be that the plan for her is to pursue the route through Bangladesh.
"Her father has some Bangladesh heritage, and that is why the British government argued that they are in a position to revoke her British nationality.
"Shamima Begum's counterargument is that she's never been to Bangladesh all she has no links with Bangladesh and if she went back there then she could possibly face the death penalty."
Shamima Begum - latest: Why ruling IS bride cannot return to UK is 'surprising' | UK News | Sky News
This is really pathetic stuff from the UK government & legal system.
Thanks for the judgement on myself not being pro human rights. I won't respond to that condescending part.
"If you think people should have certain rights unless they do bad things".
Not familiar with UK law but I assume its the same as here. Do criminals/murderers etc. get to vote or is that right stripped? Your sentence literally describes what rights people have/haven't based on their actions, which I would assume applies.
She was 15 years old at the time, and there's evidence that her (along with others) were groomed in some respects to leave the UK and join IS.
The reason to let her come back is to be tried in UK courts (as a minor), and punished accordingly and then (hopefully) rehabilitated in the UK - the place of her birth, where her family is, where her passport was from etc.
What the UK have done is rendered her stateless which is cowardly and showing a lack of accountability. And more importantly, it's an abuse of her human rights.
That’s what I’m worried about.. the precedent, and how the benchmark might get lowered in the future. Of course there is also the ethnicity element, would someone who joins a far right terror group in say Ukraine or Russia and commits atrocities also get their citizenship revoked? It does send a ““you’re British but not really British” message.. to people born here with migrant parents.
Thanks for the clarification.
This was basically the info I was trying to find out/confirm from the TL: DR post without needing to get into debates about myself being pro/anti human rights, but I understand why some people have to be argumentative to prove a point in threads like this.
As I said before, just because someone is dangerous doesn't absolve us of our responsibilities. Its so easy to say "she can't come back, she's a danger, but its secret so we can't tell you". That's way too easy and perhaps we should be slightly braver than to be scared of a 23 year old girl that we can keep a constant eye opn.we should be slightly less afraid.
She was a child. She was likely also brainwashed and trafficked. It makes perfect sense.
It’s all huff and puff from the government. They know they’ll eventually lose and have to let her back in. But if they just said ‘hey, welcome back, we’ve missed you’ they know there’d be an uproar. So they’re just posturing and they’ll be able to say ‘well we tried’ and avoid all the uproar. Nothing to see here.
I wasn't meaning to be condescending, it's the definition of human rights.
No problem.
The UK, under the Tories, have had Priti Patel and then Suella Braverman - two really odious women as Home Secs and have passed some really awful legislation with regards to Windrush scandal - Wikipedia, and revoking citizenship for British Born dual nationals ( New bill quietly gives powers to remove British citizenship without notice | Home Office | The Guardian ) - people like my parents and first generation immigrants.
If you take her back, that brainwashing is gonna take a lot of effort/resources to undo. Its not easy, especially with the quotes I'm reading about the Manchester bombing.
Just saying, from experience (not live, just being in the general region here), these kids are so brainwashed since youth, sometimes its impossible.
Alright, sorry I took it that way.
Guess its a culture thing, for you human rights is the literal definition (which is actually the correct way to interpret it). For someone like me coming from this region, human rights is mainly about being able to live freely without fear, the rest of the terms are secondary in our mind
Some info on how she was trafficked -
In 2022, investigative journalist Josh Baker retraced her route through Turkey and uncovered a vast ISIS people smuggling network that facilitated Begum's travel to Syria. He also received hundreds of pages of secret files on the smuggler that revealed the man at the heart of the network, Mohammed Rashed, was conducting an intelligence operation. A serving senior intelligence officer confirmed to Baker that Rashed was a Canadian asset. Canadian prime minister Justin Trudeau said: "Obviously we know we live in a particularly dangerous world, the fight against terrorism requires our intelligence services to continue to be flexible and to be creative in their approaches but every step of the way they are bound by strict rules, by principles and values that Canadians hold dear… and we expect that those rights be followed. I know there are questions about certain incidents or operations of the past and we will ensure to follow up on those."[23][24] Separately published in August 2022, Richard Kerbaj's book The Secret History of the Five Eyes claimed that Mohammed Rashed, who helped her travel to Syria, was passing information to Canadian intelligence, which was known to Metropolitan Police. This link was not acknowledged by British or Canadian authorities. The Canadian intelligence was using Rashed for information on the Islamic State, allowing him to help people to travel to Syria to work for the Islamic State. Kerbaj said that he interviewed many Canadian intelligence officers, which confirmed the timeline of events.[25][26]
It was reported in August 2022 that Begum’s lawyer claims the British authorities knew that Begum was helped to travel to Syria to join the Islamic State by a Canadian intelligence agent, as claimed by Richard Kerbaj in his book The Secret History of the Five Eyes, a factor that had not been brought to the attention of the Supreme Court.[25][26] Tasnime Akunjee, lawyer for the Begum family, said he had obtained a hearing in November 2022 to challenge the removal of Begum's citizenship on the basis that as Home Secretary Sajid Javid had failed to consider that she was a victim of human trafficking.[43]
In 2022, investigative journalist Josh Baker retraced her route through Turkey and uncovered a vast ISIS people smuggling network that facilitated Begum's travel to Syria. He also received hundreds of pages of secret files on the smuggler that revealed the man at the heart of the network, Mohammed Rashed, was conducting an intelligence operation. A serving senior intelligence officer confirmed to Baker that Rashed was a Canadian asset. Canadian prime minister Justin Trudeau said: "Obviously we know we live in a particularly dangerous world, the fight against terrorism requires our intelligence services to continue to be flexible and to be creative in their approaches but every step of the way they are bound by strict rules, by principles and values that Canadians hold dear… and we expect that those rights be followed. I know there are questions about certain incidents or operations of the past and we will ensure to follow up on those."[23][24] Separately published in August 2022, Richard Kerbaj's book The Secret History of the Five Eyes claimed that Mohammed Rashed, who helped her travel to Syria, was passing information to Canadian intelligence, which was known to Metropolitan Police. This link was not acknowledged by British or Canadian authorities. The Canadian intelligence was using Rashed for information on the Islamic State, allowing him to help people to travel to Syria to work for the Islamic State. Kerbaj said that he interviewed many Canadian intelligence officers, which confirmed the timeline of events.[25][26]
It was reported in August 2022 that Begum’s lawyer claims the British authorities knew that Begum was helped to travel to Syria to join the Islamic State by a Canadian intelligence agent, as claimed by Richard Kerbaj in his book The Secret History of the Five Eyes, a factor that had not been brought to the attention of the Supreme Court.[25][26] Tasnime Akunjee, lawyer for the Begum family, said he had obtained a hearing in November 2022 to challenge the removal of Begum's citizenship on the basis that as Home Secretary Sajid Javid had failed to consider that she was a victim of human trafficking.[43]
On the flip side if you let her back. You'd have to let everyone back and afford the same treatment. There could be more Shamima out there.
Our country refused hundreds of them for fear of them spreading their doctrine into the population.
https://www.bbc.com/indonesia/dunia-51410570
Our country refused hundreds of them for fear of them spreading their doctrine into the population.
https://www.bbc.com/indonesia/dunia-51410570
We all know the reason she wants to come back. Boot her into touch, the Haaland lipped twat.
Completely correct
If she were aged over 21 when she left the UK, she could not have had her citizenship removed, regardless of what she had done.
That doesn't matter really. Just because something is hard doesn't make it wrong.
Of course it doesn't matter. Was more of an observation than saying its not worth it.
Nonsense.
Government will have zero input in the outcome of any further appeal. There is no way for the Government to know what you're claiming, the fact that this appeal has been rejected is massive. If/when it finally goes to the Supreme Court, it will be a challenge on a point of Law making it unlikely to be overturned.
Well we’ll see won’t won’t we.
Got to be honest the Supreme Court under Lord Reed have been very deferential - it would not surprise me if they uphold the decision, even if the case is weak.
I hope that the case mate!
The independence of the judiciary has been undermined by the current government by holding a sword over their heads with the consultation on Judicial Review.
I wasn’t saying that they do? I’m literally just trying to get info on all this as usually the CAF is a safe place with posters willing to inform people on issues they don’t know as much about.
From the sounds of things she should be tried in the UK for terrorism or some form of it but being a minor at the time might make the sentencing a bit weak?
Makes enough sense from that angle.
Wouldn’t want her back but can understand the UK has a responsibility to try her.
Rightly or wrongly I do think there’s certain situations where what you do removes certain rights or at least should do. But because she was legally a minor she is technically a victim of grooming and despite her having supported a reprehensible group she would have been groomed at an impressionable age to join.
Hard to think of her for some this way but she’s a victim and also a criminal in my eyes.
She's our problem. We should have to deal with her.
Pretty much how I feel.
Can't we just stick her on an island like we did with Napoleon?
It also underscores the arbitrariness of the deprivation of citizenship powers.
SB was born here, but because she has a Bangladeshi father, she can be stripped of her UK citizenship on the basis that because she was under 21, she would be theoretically able to apply for citizenship there.
Meanwhile, because the killers of Jamie Bulger were born here, and had British parents, they remain British, and the taxpayer has been contributing to their new identities, lives and detention for 30 years.
They always try to interpret the law as they think the government intended it in these cases. They nor the public want her back so I'd say it's almost certain she won't be coming back.
I'd say she doesn't expect to be let back in either. Half the point of her media campaign is to ensure she doesn't wind up in a ditch somewhere.
What happens if she rocks up on a dinghy in Dover?
The UK's hospitals would be filled with stroke victims overnight
That is the fundamental role of the judiciary.
I’ve actually been surprised. Can’t really judge people by their online cover, but seen a fair few comments on Twitter by people who I’d guess are not at either political extremes who are just judging her as a child.
My opinion about the grooming aspect. While no expert by any means. I think we need to start with the acceptance that every bad/evil person was once a child. It’s also possible for someone already bad to be groomed. Then they get into something they enjoy and start rising the ranks.
I don’t know what the case is with Shamima or what her mind is like. Based on how much of a leader she apparently became, people should consider the possibility that her own personality outweighs the grooming aspect which no doubt played a role in her going. But once she was there, she might have been amongst similar minds.
Surely this is all about the government 'making an example' to try to put off others who may, in the future, be tempted to follow the same/similar path.
I think most people agree that at 15 years old, effective and considered decision -making is not part of many teenagers skill sets; however it would appear that Shamina Begun even when she was faced with reality continued in the life she had chosen, regrets only seemed to have entered her mind when IS began to fall apart.
Eventually the Government will have to take a decision based either on human rights, as many consider it should, or because it has strung out the agony, long enough and has shown its determination not to roll over on such matters.
The next stage then when her citizenship is restored, will be deciding what to do with her?
I think most people agree that at 15 years old, effective and considered decision -making is not part of many teenagers skill sets; however it would appear that Shamina Begun even when she was faced with reality continued in the life she had chosen, regrets only seemed to have entered her mind when IS began to fall apart.
Eventually the Government will have to take a decision based either on human rights, as many consider it should, or because it has strung out the agony, long enough and has shown its determination not to roll over on such matters.
The next stage then when her citizenship is restored, will be deciding what to do with her?
Don’t get why if she is no longer a British citizen she‘s still receiving legal aid?
Absolute gravy train for her legal team.
Absolute gravy train for her legal team.