Judges Rule Shamima Begum Should Be Allowed Back In The Uk

[catmiss 12]

tv news says there are approx 140 people who have been deprived of citizenship who will be watching the outcome of the court case and some of them, depending on the outcome, will follow suit. Have we got the expertise to de-radicalise and monitor them?

Edited July 16, 2020 by catmiss
Typo

[Martin C 81]

2 hours ago, Dardandec said:

You do know she will end up back here eventually and permanently right?  The courts will make it happen. You weren't all born yesterday were you?  End of thread.

Indeed.  And then a year or two down the line she'll probably be involved in planning or 'executing' a terrorist atrocity.

[Baron99 794]

6 hours ago, Pyrotequila said:

With regards to her citizenship;

she married some ISIS terrorists, so why doesn't she get citizenship wth their countries?

And if not, then she's been living in Syria since 2015...so why wouldn't she be a Syrian citizen?

Her Dutch ISIS 'husband' at one stage tried that back in 2019 but firstly, the Dutch didn't seem that keen on her, given they view her as a terrorist.  Secondly, she appears to have left him?

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-47431249

Edited July 17, 2020 by Baron99

[Baron99 794]

5 hours ago, Dardandec said:

You do know she will end up back here eventually and permanently right?  The courts will make it happen. You weren't all born yesterday were you?  End of thread.

Sadly, I believe you'll end up proved right on this? 

 

Once back in the UK, she'll never be removed, especially when the full facts of her involvement with ISIS come to light.  There will be years of legal arguments with appeals & counter appeals & at the end of the day it will be the UK tax payers picking up the bill for both the prosecution & defence.  Begum won't have a penny to her name for any court cases. Remember the millions spent by taxpayers on the likes of Abu Hamza? 

 

Begum will end up as some kind of cause célèbre amongst certain groups in all of this.  The media will be falling over themselves to get to interview her. 

 

The way of the word today, she'll probably end up as the 'go to' person / social commentator for all things terrorist related, in the media in a few years?  Shamina Begum, celebrity terrorist! 

Edited July 17, 2020 by Baron99

[whiteowl 54]

As is often the case, Newsthump hits the nail on the head. You don't have to read the article, the hyperlink gives you the gist of it

 

https://newsthump.com/2020/07/16/sympathy-for-victims-of-grooming-stops-if-the-child-is-brown-confirm-racists/

 

From one of the comments on their Facebook feed :

 

"Odious and an obnoxious terrorist sympathiser she may be but nobody, including the Government and its ministers is above the law. She has not been found guilty of a criminal offence either under British or international law. It is every British citizen's right to undergo a trial by jury before being punished by the law. The Government's punishment by revoking her British citizenship has not been arrived at by a proper legal process. I'd love to see her rot in a refugee camp but I also do not support the 'lynch mob' attitude of so many. If any of us are accused of a crime, we ALL have the right to undergo the legal process set out in statute and in Common Law"

 

Let a court decide the level of her complicity rather than a virtual lynch mob. She's a British citizen and that is her right.

[Tomm06 12]

24 minutes ago, whiteowl said:

As is often the case, Newsthump hits the nail on the head. You don't have to read the article, the hyperlink gives you the gist of it

 

https://newsthump.com/2020/07/16/sympathy-for-victims-of-grooming-stops-if-the-child-is-brown-confirm-racists/

 

From one of the comments on their Facebook feed :

 

"Odious and an obnoxious terrorist sympathiser she may be but nobody, including the Government and its ministers is above the law. She has not been found guilty of a criminal offence either under British or international law. It is every British citizen's right to undergo a trial by jury before being punished by the law. The Government's punishment by revoking her British citizenship has not been arrived at by a proper legal process. I'd love to see her rot in a refugee camp but I also do not support the 'lynch mob' attitude of so many. If any of us are accused of a crime, we ALL have the right to undergo the legal process set out in statute and in Common Law"

 

Let a court decide the level of her complicity rather than a virtual lynch mob. She's a British citizen and that is her right.

My understanding is not the 'lynch' mob wanting her to rot in a camp it's simply just a "you've made your bed" argument. It also doesn't help why she left and what she stands for. Look I'm more than willing to be proved wrong but I would say the chances of her coming back to the UK and being the sort of citizen we want are quite slim, some will even claim she's a danger. 

[Tony 10]

The age of criminal responsibility in the UK is 10 years old. 

 

https://www.gov.uk/age-of-criminal-responsibility#:~:text=The age of criminal responsibility,or charged with a crime.

[L00b 441]

26 minutes ago, Tony said:

The age of criminal responsibility in the UK is 10 years old. 

 

https://www.gov.uk/age-of-criminal-responsibility#:~:text=The age of criminal responsibility,or charged with a crime.

Aside from membership of ISIL (assuming that was 'in the UK', and so a domestic criminal offence to which your point is relevant), what other crime(s) did she commit in the UK?

 

Edit: let's have an answer, then we can start talking about the proportionality of the government's sentence-without-due-process-for-PR-effect.

Edited July 17, 2020 by L00b

[Halibut 12]

16 minutes ago, Tony said:

The age of criminal responsibility in the UK is 10 years old. 

 

https://www.gov.uk/age-of-criminal-responsibility#:~:text=The age of criminal responsibility,or charged with a crime.

Begum hasn't been convicted of any crimes though. And 15 year olds are not the adults they later become.

[nightrider 13]

19 hours ago, the_bloke said:

Which is what will have to be proven in court. It was widely reported at the time that the government said she was eligible for Bangladeshi citizenship, which is why it was thought lawful to remove her UK citizenship.

 

https://www.ejiltalk.org/shamima-begum-may-be-a-bangladeshi-citizen-after-all/

 

It is evident that the relevant legal provisions are far from precise and efficient. However, it is abundantly clear that Ms Begum is legally a citizen of Bangladesh until she attains the age of 21 years. Thus, the claims of the Government of Bangladesh and some others that Ms Begum is not a Bangladeshi citizen owing to the fact that she does not hold a Bangladeshi passport or any other proof of citizenship, has never submitted any application for dual nationality, and has never visited Bangladesh, have no legal basis.

 

Therefore, as of February 2019, Ms Begum is legally a Bangladeshi citizen. Consequently, the decision of the Home Office to deprive her of her British citizenship does not legally render her stateless. Hence, the measure is not unlawful insofar as the issue of statelessness is concerned. Although, it may very well be unlawful on other grounds, whether under British law or even international law.

Interesting. If true she is a citizen of Bangladesh. We still won't be able to deport her there though because presumably they won't accept her into the country?

 

Ironically I suspect if we had not stripped her of citizenship she would not be coming back here - my understanding is that the journey out of Syria, from her location, is sufficiently dangerous that without help she would never make it out alive. Now someone is providing funds for safe passage to come and have the legal appeal.

Edited July 17, 2020 by nightrider

[frigate 10]

Now, as many many business people have been using zoom and such like to conduct business meetings and working from home, and doing so with some ease it seems, a question to the eu remainer judge.

Why is it necessary at all for the terrorist supporter, as thats what she is, to be back in the UK to take part in the case. She can call her lawyers as well participate via skype for instance????  

I'd appeal the decsion given the judge ignores the woman is a terrorist supporter, and well known and reliable technology these days to allow her to be part of the case  IN ANOTHER COUNTRY.    

19 minutes ago, L00b said:

Aside from membership of ISIL (assuming that was 'in the UK', and so a domestic criminal offence to which your point is relevant), what other crime(s) did she commit in the UK?

 

Edit: let's have an answer, then we can start talking about the proportionality of the government's sentence-without-due-process-for-PR-effect.

She was a committed Islamist extremist before she left the UK. Will there be any criminal investigation once she is in Britain as to whether or not she committed crimes while an ISIS bride? Others in her position were complicit in keeping Christian and Yazhidi slaves including children, and have been tried eg in Germany.

[frigate 10]

1 hour ago, Halibut said:

Lol. 

She was 15 when she ''made her bed''. You never made any poor decisions at 15 I guess? 

Her stated allegiance was to ISIS and she worked very hard to further their aim.  
Lots of info online available if you would like to learn more of this case .