Current Affairs Bethnal Green Three

Status
Not open for further replies.
I think that what people are concerned about is that their maybe insufficient evidence to convict her of more serious crimes under existing anti-terrorist legislation. Lack of eye witness evidence, lack of hard intel etc...

So she is guilty of belonginging to a terrorist organisation that much we could prove - so if she ever did return to this country, she could very well be tried and convicted of that although I'm not sure of what type of sentence she would be given. This would probably be followed up with many years of a probationary monitoring system being put in place (has to report to police station 3 times daily/nightly curfew, blah blah). All running alongside some form of rehabilitation / de-toxification process.

Personally I don't think she herself presents a threat to the British public, however she could be seen and used by shadier figures as a figurehead, a living, rallying symbol of western oppression against Islam. So in that sense she does still pose a security risk and that needs to be taken into consideration.

Don't know what the answer is here. I hope that we don't let her back. I don't care where she ends up beit Bangladesh, Amsterdam or rotting in Syria.
There's hundreds more just like her in Syria being held by Kurds/US/Syrians and they will want to come home as well. What do we do then?
Previous instances have seen sentences differ wildly depending upon a number of charges related to the offence, such as financing Terror and social media posts. Around 2 years seems standard..I think you are correct in that on balance, she doesn't seem to pose a risk to the UK, but the risk to her and her child are high.

You have to add in the fact that she was 15 at the time as well.
 
As distasteful as it may be,you have to weight up if you want to live in a country that is governed by the rules of it's own democratic and international laws or social media.

She decided to leave. She made her bed. The met didn't do enough to stop it happening.

It's a nasty situation. But, if she's really concerned so much about the welfare of her child, send the child back to live with her family - they are the victims in this, not her.

I honestly have no sympathy for her or the others.
 
She decided to leave. She made her bed. The met didn't do enough to stop it happening.

It's a nasty situation. But, if she's really concerned so much about the welfare of her child, send the child back to live with her family - they are the victims in this, not her.

I honestly have no sympathy for her or the others.
My post was not sympathetic to her,it's about the question does the UK have a system of law that can be relied on or is it now about what trends on social media?
 
You

You read wrong,they are saying she has no rights to citizenship.
I read it that although she currently does not have citizenship, as she is under twenty-one and because of her mother's citizenship then she'd be entitled to it.

Whether she wants to uptake that citizenship is a different issue indeed, but the HO's perspective (rightly or wrongly) is that she would therefore need to take it.

Bangladesh on the other hand do not want her entering their nation, so I'm not sure of the legality of denying it to her. I guess we're trying to beat them to it!
 
She decided to leave. She made her bed. The met didn't do enough to stop it happening.

It's a nasty situation. But, if she's really concerned so much about the welfare of her child, send the child back to live with her family - they are the victims in this, not her.

I honestly have no sympathy for her or the others.
Send the child to the environment that created the mother in the first instance.

Gold star for you.
 
I read it that although she currently does not have citizenship, as she is under twenty-one and because of her mother's citizenship then she'd be entitled to it.

Whether she wants to uptake that citizenship is a different issue indeed, but the HO's perspective (rightly or wrongly) is that she would therefore need to take it.

Bangladesh on the other hand do not want her entering their nation, so I'm not sure of the legality of denying it to her. I guess we're trying to beat them to it!
Seemingly she either has an entitlement to Bangladeshi citizenship or automatic rights to it, in which case the UK have not made her stateless. It's largely irrelevant if the Bangladeshi government don't recognise her as a citizen, because she may have an automatic right.

But the government hasn't yet released the rationale for the decision, so it's somewhat speculative at the moment.
 
I read it that although she currently does not have citizenship, as she is under twenty-one and because of her mother's citizenship then she'd be entitled to it.

Whether she wants to uptake that citizenship is a different issue indeed, but the HO's perspective (rightly or wrongly) is that she would therefore need to take it.

Bangladesh on the other hand do not want her entering their nation, so I'm not sure of the legality of denying it to her. I guess we're trying to beat them to it!
I've a feeling whatever Bangladesh say now,a look at their foreign aid balance sheet will give the UK Govt the outcome they require.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Welcome

Join the Everton conversation today.
Fewer ads, full access, completely free.

🛒 Visit Shop

Support Grand Old Team by checking out our latest Everton gear!
Back
Top