Genuinely couldn’t care less if she returns. There’s far bigger dangers in this country.
Current Affairs Bethnal Green Three
- Thread starter tommytowne
- Start date
- Status
Yes I agree, although I expect it is more luck than judgement on the part of the Home Office.
Nevertheless, it will be subject to appeal and legal review.
I agree. While there are valid concerns about her return, I do believe that it is more of a political and propaganda tool - that's where it's true value lies.
NilSatisOptimum
Player Valuation: £70m
Last time I looked its not illegal to witness severed heads.
It appears, that the decision has been made as a result of a lack of criminal redress by the UK in this instance (although they would now have powers to deal with similar instances of travel to Syria as a designated area). Whether that becomes an argument for the courts in respect to her 'threat' to the UK I'm sure will be debated.
Im not sympathetic to her and would happily see her imprisoned , my only issue is the legality of the move because next time or in 10 years it might be somebody I do have sympathy for but it’ll be too late.
Could be wrong or rather the source could be but heard a lawyer saying she’s entitled but it doesn’t transfer to her automatically like it would do on the case of other nationalities but she in fact has to apply for it and hasn’t . Which would obviously mean she’s not even close to a citizen .
NilSatisOptimum
Player Valuation: £70m
I won't trade my British values in so readily, follow due process, rehabilitation and remorse, with that comes forgiveness.
That's what I read. From what I can tell, the view of the HO is that while she has not applied for citizenship, if she did then it must be granted without refusal.
Therefore is revoking her UK citizenship then leaving her stateless as she has the opportunity to receive Bangladeshi citizenship? To not take it would be her choice.
Obviously, the UK, Bangladesh and her lawyers may all have different perspectives of this and therefore, as @JEBUS_LIVES mentioned, I expect it will go to court.
I think a couple of people who were actual dual nationals had their citizenship revoked got it back through the courts , my guess is that’s what’ll happen as this looks like it’s been planned on the back of fag packet.
The HO might look to rely on this decision, whichever has obvious parallels here.
The question will be if traveling to Syria to live under a particular regime nets the threshold of 'conducive to the public good' s40 British Nationality Act. The general rule is a crime or course of activity that has caused or will cause serious harm - which I'm not sure applied here.
When deporting foreign criminals is in the public interest - UK Human Rights Blog
RU (Bangladesh) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2011] EWCA Civ 651 – Read Judgment Further to our recent post on the deportation of foreign criminals, the matter has once again come to the attention of the Court of Appeal. This case determines how the First-tier Tribunal, the...
ukhumanrightsblog.com
I have serious worries about what the implications are for foreign aid/Humanitarian assistance and also what it sets as precedence for the rights of the Home Secretary.
Slightly crude example, but let's say for instance you take a political group as 'terrorist' or a designated area as right for deprival - those potentially travelling to provide Humanitarian aid or other support in those countries could reasonably have their citizenship revoked.
True, however does the fact that she seemed to view severed heads as " just one of those things " not strike you as a tiny bit worrying.
Not necessarily. Terrorist organisations are listed as prescribed groups, but it is varied as to the organisations on that list and the Terrorism Act 2000 defines the specific instances where conviction can occur. The new Act from February makes it an offence to travel to 'designated areas' but it cannot be retrospectively applied.
I'd be amazed if she wasn't charged on specific grounds by the Police - they'll have been keeping tabs on her time in Syria and before she travelled.
Well yes, but I find people supporting Liverpool worrying, doesn't mean they should have their rights removed.
You can't be prosecuted for what you think and the Met have previously stated that they do not think any terror offences have been committed.
Missing girls lured by Isis won't face terrorism charges, says Met chief
Bernard Hogan-Howe gives reassurance as families deny that their daughters stole jewellery to finance journey to Syria
- Status