3 minutes ago, billd766 said:

I doubt that she has killed any more people than you have, hiding anonymously behind your keyboard.

 

Granted what she did was the height of stupidity but at 15 with a home background and a future like she would have faced it, may have been just a lark to begin with.

 

What 15 year old nowadays or even then know what they want yo do for the next 50 or 60 years of their lives.

 

Having said that I still wouldn't want her back in the UK.

Some lark. Ran away to support Isis killing british soldiers. Do gooders like you would forget that and agree we pay millions for her legal fees. Sod that

3 hours ago, The Old Bull said:

For cash

Perhaps Tony Blair's wife would volunteer, though U hear she is very very expensive to represent you.

16 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

She’ll eventually win her case.

 

Stripping a person of their citizenship on the basis of their actions as a child will clearly not stand, not should it.

 

 

 

"Child" is stretching it a bit as she was only a month away from her 16th birthday.  I think "young adult" is a more appropriate label.   

1 minute ago, James105 said:

 

"Child" is stretching it a bit as she was only a month away from her 16th birthday.  I think "young adult" is a more appropriate label.   

What does the law say?

21 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

She’ll eventually win her case.

 

Stripping a person of their citizenship on the basis of their actions as a child will clearly not stand, not should it.

 

 

Child...........😂

1 minute ago, Chomper Higgot said:

What does the law say?

It says she is barred from the UK.............

Has she been tried yet for her crimes?  Even if she was a British citizen surely the normal procedure is stand trial in the jurisdiction the crime was committed in, get convicted, handed punishment, serve however long in prison and then eventually deported back to the UK.  It makes me laugh when the morons claim she should "face justice in the UK" as though everyone is stupid enough to believe that is even possible.   She should face trial along with all the other ISIS fighters before the British citizenship is even a relevant talking point.   

1 minute ago, transam said:

It says she is barred from the UK.............

That’s what the court says.

 

What the law says is still being tested.

 

Enjoy while it lasts.

1 minute ago, Chomper Higgot said:

That’s what the court says.

 

What the law says is still being tested.

 

Enjoy while it lasts.

No, you enjoy it, it's your anti-UK thing.........

2 hours ago, Kinnock said:

Next we need to cancel the Citizenship of a few more people who are still in the UK.

Why is that? If they committed crimes, have a trial and lock them up.

It is supposed to be illegal in the UK to make someone stateless.

She is currently stateless.

 

The law that allows the revocation of nationality was supposed to be used on people who naturalised in the UK and then commited a crime, so that at the end of their sentence, they would have to return to their original country.

It's not supposed to be used against people who were born in the UK, British at birth, and definitely not supposed to be used against people with no other nationality - because we're signed up to a UN treaty that says we will not make someone stateless.

 

Having the ability to make her stateless because she was still under 21 at the time, so in theory COULD still apply for another nationality because of where her mother was born, when the government would not have been allowed to do it if she was 22 - is particularly odd.

 

Personally, I think she was born in the UK, grew up in the UK, had British nationality (and no other nationality) so she should be the UK's problem to deal with. If that means stick her in jail when she returns, so be it (assuming she's done something that she can be charged with so that there's a court case...)

 

 

Jonathan Sumption, former Justice of the Supreme court and one of the smartest legal brains in the country, demolishes the argument that the UK can cast its obligations aside in this case.

 

" By statute, the home secretary cannot deprive a person of British citizenship if it would render them stateless. The person must have citizenship of at least one other country. When the decision was made, in 2019, Ms Begum was 19. She was a citizen of Bangladesh, but only in the most technical sense. She had provisional citizenship until she was 21, when it would lapse unless she took it up. This was because her parents were born there. But she has never been to Bangladesh. She has no links with the country. And Bangladesh has disowned her. Her Bangladeshi citizenship always was a legal fiction."

1 minute ago, bkk_mike said:

Personally, I think she was born in the UK, grew up in the UK, had British nationality (and no other nationality) so she should be the UK's problem to deal with. If that means stick her in jail when she returns, so be it (assuming she's done something that she can be charged with so that there's a court case...)

 

Her crimes were committed in another jurisdiction.   If you were from the UK but committed a crime in Thailand (for example) where would you expect to be tried for this crime?  I am pretty sure that if you were from the UK it would not be the UK's problem no matter how unpleasant your upbringing was.  

2 minutes ago, jayboy said:

Jonathan Sumption, former Justice of the Supreme court and one of the smartest legal brains in the country, demolishes the argument that the UK can cast its obligations aside in this case.

 

" By statute, the home secretary cannot deprive a person of British citizenship if it would render them stateless. The person must have citizenship of at least one other country. When the decision was made, in 2019, Ms Begum was 19. She was a citizen of Bangladesh, but only in the most technical sense. She had provisional citizenship until she was 21, when it would lapse unless she took it up. This was because her parents were born there. But she has never been to Bangladesh. She has no links with the country. And Bangladesh has disowned her. Her Bangladeshi citizenship always was a legal fiction."

 

Sounds like she has a good case to appeal the decision of Bangladesh then to deprive her of citizenship.   If their legal aid system is not as generous then it seems pretty clear she has a lot of support from the leftist community in the UK who could start a GoFundMe for her and contribute some of their cash to get this over the line.      

5 hours ago, herfiehandbag said:

Leaving her to rot, stateless and destitute in a refugee camp will solve nothing

She's not "stateless", she is entitled to citizenship/passport of the country from where her parents brought her before they settled in the UK.  If she only had entitlement to UK citizenship, the UK could not remove that citizenship.

Edited February 24, 20242 yr by Liverpool Lou

2 minutes ago, Liverpool Lou said:

She's not "stateless", she is entitled to citizenship/passport of the country from where her parents brought her before they settled in the UK.  If she only had entitlement to UK citizenship, the UK could not remove that citizenship.

Thought she was born in the UK...

5 hours ago, stevenl said:

But I thought this was the highest court, what else is there to appeal?

There's still the Supreme Court?

Edited February 24, 20242 yr by Liverpool Lou

5 hours ago, jippytum said:

Good. I hope this killer terrorist rots in the hell hole she chose over the UK. 

 

She's a killer?

1 hour ago, Chomper Higgot said:

She’ll eventually win her case.

She won't, her request for an appeal has been denied. 

58 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

1 hour ago, James105 said:

 

"Child" is stretching it a bit as she was only a month away from her 16th birthday.  I think "young adult" is a more appropriate label.   

What does the law say?

The law has said that she's welcome to buggger off to Bangladesh where she is entitled to citizenship courtesy of her Bangladeshi-citizen parents.

40 minutes ago, bkk_mike said:

It is supposed to be illegal in the UK to make someone stateless.

She is currently stateless.

She's not stateless, she's entitled to Bangladeshi citizenship, the UK has not made her stateless.

25 minutes ago, bkk_mike said:

Personally, I think she was born in the UK, grew up in the UK, had British nationality (and no other nationality) so she should be the UK's problem to deal with. If that means stick her in jail when she returns, so be it (assuming she's done something that she can be charged with so that there's a court case...)

The problem is the UK justice system is not set up to deal with Islamic extremists who are 'hard coded' and will likely never change their view. It's a relatively new phenomenon, and it would be very hard to introduce special treatment for Islamic extremist crimes. There would be uproar from the left.

 

It's almost impossible to rehabilitate an Islamic extremist, as has been proved many times. Begum may well be a reformed character, but she also might be faking it. 

 

The Parole Board are too easily tricked, and someone like Begum would be freed after a couple of years. That's why the majority of the British public are pleased she's not coming back to the UK. 

39 minutes ago, transam said:

43 minutes ago, Liverpool Lou said:

She's not "stateless", she is entitled to citizenship/passport of the country from where her parents brought her before they settled in the UK.  If she only had entitlement to UK citizenship, the UK could not remove that citizenship.

Thought she was born in the UK...

Yes, tried to edit it but was too late, I should have said, "...from where her Bangladeshi parents are from before they settled in the UK".

Edited February 24, 20242 yr by Liverpool Lou

Time for Sky News, et al, to remove the "schoolgirl" references from these sympathy-grabbing reports, she's a woman, she hasn't been a schoolgirl for the best part of ten years. 

6 minutes ago, Liverpool Lou said:

Time for Sky News, et al, to remove the "schoolgirl" references from these sympathy-grabbing reports, she's a woman, she hasn't been a schoolgirl for the best part of ten years. 

 

   I wonder whether all her sympathisers would also have the same opinion about Abu Hamza ?

 

33 minutes ago, Liverpool Lou said:

She won't, her request for an appeal has been denied. 

Source please.

If Begum did eventually come back to the UK, she would make a fortune from publicity, film rights etc.

She could use her fame as a platform. She could become an ambassador for anti-extremism, talking publicly about how toxic this ideology is, speaking in every school, and campaigning for the rest of her life against extremism. She could prevent countless young Muslims from taking the wrong path. 

 

If she made this her goal, the British public might support her return to the UK, and by extension the UK government.

 

If I was advising her I'd tell her to go down that route. 

3 minutes ago, CG1 Blue said:

If Begum did eventually come back to the UK, she would make a fortune from publicity, film rights etc.

She could use her fame as a platform. She could become an ambassador for anti-extremism, talking publicly about how toxic this ideology is, speaking in every school, and campaigning for the rest of her life against extremism. She could prevent countless young Muslims from taking the wrong path. 

 

If she made this her goal, the British public might support her return to the UK, and by extension the UK government.

 

If I was advising her I'd tell her to go down that route. 

 

   Then again, allowing her back will send a message that terrorists will be forgiven if they go abroad and commit terrorism and they can just come back to the UK as if nothing had happened 

10 minutes ago, stevenl said:

44 minutes ago, Liverpool Lou said:

She won't, her request for an appeal has been denied. 

Source please.

The OP!  

7 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

An excellent decision, IMO. Making, beds and lying in them comes to mind.

Is this the same girl who tried or did join up with that organization who chopped heads off ?