• Welcome, guest!

    This is a forum devoted to discussion of Wolverhampton Wanderers.
    Why not sign up and contribute? Registered members get a fully ad-free experience!

Shamima Begum

the government would not be able to remove Begum’s British citizenship if she is not a dual national, as that would leave her stateless, which is contrary to international law. However, the home secretary has been advised that because Begum’s mother holds a Bangladeshi passport, he may be able to.

From this....it is very much taking a punt
 
That would mean she has to actively claim Bangladeshi citizenship...and they can say no if they want.

As for appeasing the Heil, never underestimate how close Cruella is to Dacre. Which is a horrifying partnership. I'd rather have dinner with Nigel Farage, Piers Morgan and Hitler's ghost than those two.
 
Deutsch Wolf said:
Not keen on that. Making someone effectively stateless is a shithouse move.

If she's committed a crime, prosecute her.
Click to expand...

Kenny said:
I presume the Home Sec has some sound legal advice and we are not going to see a shit ton of money wasted through the courts fighting this only to be told, as per International Law you can't do that.

Unless of course she has got dual citizenship then its all good and the matter is closed
Click to expand...

Kenny said:
the government would not be able to remove Begum’s British citizenship if she is not a dual national, as that would leave her stateless, which is contrary to international law. However, the home secretary has been advised that because Begum’s mother holds a Bangladeshi passport, he may be able to.

From this....it is very much taking a punt
Click to expand...

Yep!
 
Sky news reporting shes a dual citizen to Bangladesh
 
However, it now appears Javid has been advised he can use the Bangladeshi citizenship of Begum’s mother to prevent her return. In the view of the family’s lawyer, however, that advice is incorrect. “Our view is that this would be illegal because they would make her a stateless person, in breach of international law. We are surprised the home secretary does not understand international law, or care about international law,” Akunjee said.

“If he were to attempt to put such orders on, we would explore all legal options to block his unlawful actions or appeal. If we can get an injunction, we will.”

Begum’s relatives have called for her to be looked upon as a “girl who was groomed at the age of 15”. They said that comments she has made to journalists, characterised by some as betraying a lack of remorse, should be viewed with skepticism.


“We are also mindful that Shamima is currently in a camp surrounded by Isis sympathisers, and any comments by her could lead directly to danger to her and her child,” they told ITV News.
 
He would break the British Nationality Act unless he can get his argument in under Section 40 (4) which was inserted by the immigration act 2014, I reckon.

But that does not prevent the Secretary of State from making an order under subsection (2) to deprive a person of a citizenship status if—
(a)the citizenship status results from the person's naturalisation,
(b)the Secretary of State is satisfied that the deprivation is conducive to the public good because the person, while having that citizenship status, has conducted him or herself in a manner which is seriously prejudicial to the vital interests of the United Kingdom, any of the Islands, or any British overseas territory, and
(c)the Secretary of State has reasonable grounds for believing that the person is able, under the law of a country or territory outside the United Kingdom, to become a national of such a country or territory.]

So it all rather still hinges on Bangladesh in this case. If they say no dice, then Javid is on a bit of a cleft stick. He is arguing that her mother's passport means that Bangladesh must grant her similar status to the one that we want to take away.

Bit of a can of worms, but the letter, written by a six-year-old clearly, contains all the requisite notices for action under that section.
 
Anyone else thinking the government may have done this because come brexit we are out of the European court of justice so she won't be able to appeal this decision there,the government knowing this have told her to clear off while sticking their tongue out and doing the waggly fingers by the ears thing.
The other thing is I'm sick of her being all over my Facebook feed as a meme,with people taking the piss and joining in the hate mob mentality when I thought they were better than that.
 
Irrespective of my feelings towards the individual in question the notion that anybody who has a parent born outside Britain isn't really British sits really uncomfortably.
 
Tony Towner said:
Irrespective of my feelings towards the individual in question the notion that anybody who has a parent born outside Britain isn't really British sits really uncomfortably.
Click to expand...

I think it's more a means to an (uncomfortable) end. I don't think the use of this is taken lightly given the far right will jump all over this for the reason you mention.

I can understand, if not agree, with the government's decision but it does set a precedent that didn't need to be set.
 
Why isn't she trying to get in Holland? seeing as she's married to that Dutch fella that wanted to blow a concert up?
 
Tony Towner said:
Irrespective of my feelings towards the individual in question the notion that anybody who has a parent born outside Britain isn't really British sits really uncomfortably.
Click to expand...

Johnny75 said:
I think it's more a means to an (uncomfortable) end. I don't think the use of this is taken lightly given the far right will jump all over this for the reason you mention.

I can understand, if not agree, with the government's decision but it does set a precedent that didn't need to be set.
Click to expand...

Such a debate.

Initially I thought the Begum family were very astute in raising this now. It forced the issue while she was still overseas and therefore not at risk of arrest and imprisonment here, albiet in a shithole of a camp.The government were then left with the options

1. Ship her home, investigate her and charge her with something- time consuming , costly and a huge risk as the burden of proof is beyond reasonable doubt and the fact that its so high profile she would argue that she may not get a fair trial even if there was something to charge her with.
2. She is so young and has a child so
3. She would need protection when she came out if she served any time or protection forever if no charges were brought.
4. Find some loophole to buy time- take a punt while investigations go on behind the scenes for something more substantive.

I reckon this is option four. I am convinced that option one doesnt exist or would be incredibly hard to prove. If you keep her out of the country she is not your problem if 1,2,3 apply. If she gets back home then 1,2, 3 must come into play and as I have already said I fear she walks and becomes a burden. I dont like option 4 but the home secretary by taking this punt has bought some time. Its a necessary evil unfortunately.
 
The thing that has upset me most about this whole charade is the level of utter hatred, hyperbole and resentment spouted by people I thought I knew well. People who I considered to be kind, good people.

Honestly, it's been appalling. "Let the bitch fry in hell", "fuck her, terrorist slag" etc etc. And yes, they're direct quotes from social media.

What the actual fuck makes people that wound up that they feel they have to resort to that kind of shit? It's like a competition to see who can be the most offended at the thought of her coming back to the UK.

I think it's a very complex situation with no easy answer, but I am growing very weary with the black or white extremes to things. If you don't think she should be shot, it must obviously mean you'd welcome her back into the country with open arms with full forgiveness. Issues like this one need to be looked at carefully, and the powers that be need to try and come up with other solutions, not ones that pander to either extremes for cheap political gain.

Speaks volumes when the most sense I've seen on the whole sorry subject has been from Danny fucking Dyer.
 
Strange that when children protested about climate change, the Tories opinion is that they have no idea what they are talking about.

Suddenly this child absolutely knows her own mind and knew what she was doing when she first left the country.

PS Great post Langers. Best I've seen on this subject.
 
Langers said:
The thing that has upset me most about this whole charade is the level of utter hatred, hyperbole and resentment spouted by people I thought I knew well. People who I considered to be kind, good people.

Honestly, it's been appalling. "Let the bitch fry in hell", "fuck her, terrorist slag" etc etc. And yes, they're direct quotes from social media.

What the actual fuck makes people that wound up that they feel they have to resort to that kind of shit? It's like a competition to see who can be the most offended at the thought of her coming back to the UK.

I think it's a very complex situation with no easy answer, but I am growing very weary with the black or white extremes to things. If you don't think she should be shot, it must obviously mean you'd welcome her back into the country with open arms with full forgiveness. Issues like this one need to be looked at carefully, and the powers that be need to try and come up with other solutions, not ones that pander to either extremes for cheap political gain.

Speaks volumes when the most sense I've seen on the whole sorry subject has been from Danny fucking Dyer.
Click to expand...

And that is exactly what can happen, behind the scenes , now the home secretary has taken this step. It was Begum herself or her family that highlighted this almost 400 people who fled to follow ISIS have returned I believe and 399 havent been debated. This was a calculated move and a shrewd one by the Begum family designed to stir up just the sort of shit storm that it has. Once its made such national news how the hell does she get a fair trial? Its a brilliant strategy and it worked perfectly until the Home secretary revoked her citizenship. That is now the issue for debate and that could take weeks or months to sort out.

I am completely with you. The reaction has been exceptionally vitriolic but that is completed expected and I would say completely in line with what the family wanted. If you have an option where you cant get a fair trial then its a real card to play. I seem to remember the Lockerbie bomber played that card too . That trial was then held abroad in the netherlands.
 
these sort of public reaction/lynch mob mentality happens whenever something like this hits the media, i don't think it's particularly new.

i have my views on this situation like everyone else but it should be irrelevant to how the government assesses it under the law. i think that revocation of citizenship should be on the basis of an objective process not on either the whim of the home secretary on the day or on public opinion. its not clear to me that there has been any objective assessment here, more a reaction and posturing seemingly on the back of tv interviews not attended by any government rep. i also heard there's over a 100 cases of revocation of citizenship based on dual nationality makes me wonder what those were all about.
 
I don't know enough about it to comment. In my head though I am thinking she should never walk freely in our country again. That's about it.
 
Paddingtonwolf said:
She isn't Dutch.
Click to expand...

Ahh. Sorry Just read the "being married to a Dutch person" citizenship rules.
Assuming it wasn't a "12 Yr old making daisy chains" marriage she's fucked anyway.... Seems these Liberal EU types have stricter rules than our nazi government.

Regardless, the reporter fucked her over and her big mouth fucked her over.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top