Image copyright
Pennsylvania
Begum was 15 years old and living in Bethnal Green, London, when she left the UK in 2015
Shamima Begum should be allowed to return to the UK to fight the decision to withdraw her British citizenship, the Court of Appeal has ruled.
Begum, now 20, was one of three female students who left London to join the Islamic State group in Syria in 2015.
The Interior Ministry revoked her citizenship for security reasons after she was found in a refugee camp in 2019.
The Court of Appeal said that he had been denied a fair hearing because he was unable to present his case from the Syrian camp.
The Interior Ministry said the decision was “very disappointing” and that it “would request permission to appeal.”
The ruling means the government must now find a way to allow the 20-year-old, who is currently in Camp Roj, northern Syria, to appear in court in London despite repeatedly saying it would not help get her out. from Syria.
Lord Justice Flaux, seated with Lady Justice King and Lord Justice Singh, said: “Impartiality and justice must, on the facts of this case, overcome national security concerns, to allow authorization to appeal.”
The judge also said that national security concerns about her “could be addressed and handled if she returns to the UK.”
Former Home Secretary Sajid Javid, who made the decision to strip Ms. Begum of her citizenship in February 2019, tweeted a statement saying he was “deeply concerned about the ruling.”
He said that regardless of the outcome of her case, if Ms Begum came to the UK “it will be impossible to eliminate her later.”
Begum “is not afraid to face justice”
Daniel Furner, Ms. Begum’s attorney, said: “Ms. Begum never had a fair chance to give her side of the story.
“He is not afraid to face British justice, he welcomes him. But stripping him of his citizenship without an opportunity to clear his name is not justice, quite the contrary.”
Her father Ahmed Ali told the BBC that he was “delighted” with the ruling, adding that he hoped his daughter would get “justice.”
The prime minister’s official spokesman said that while the government “does not routinely comment on individual cases,” the decisions it made about Begum had not been “taken lightly.”
He said the government “will always guarantee the security of the United Kingdom and will not allow anything to jeopardize this.”
Shamima Begum is not yet packing her bags to return to the UK: There is no government plane warming up the engines at a military airfield to take the young Eastender home.
But the Court of Appeal could not have been clearer in its wording: it needs to be allowed to return to present its case in the interests of justice.
This is an unprecedented ruling, and the government has a matter of weeks to convince the Supreme Court to review it again.
If so, it could have important implications for the UK’s policy of excluding some British-backed IS supporters by depriving them of nationality once they are outside the UK.
Dozens of these people, all considered a threat to national security, could attempt to return to the UK while fighting for their case to regain their British citizenship.
Other governments have voluntarily repatriated these fighters and have tried to contain their threat through intensive prosecution, monitoring and deradicalization. The UK has so far refused to do the same.
Ms. Begum’s legal team questioned the measure for three reasons: that it was illegal because it left her stateless; exposed her to a real risk of death or inhuman and degrading treatment; and was unable to effectively challenge the decision while being prohibited from returning to the United Kingdom.
Under international law, it is only legal to revoke someone’s citizenship if an individual has the right to citizenship of another country.
Media playback is not supported on your device
In February, a specialized court, the Special Commission for Immigration Appeals (SIAC), ruled that the decision to remove Ms. Begum’s citizenship was legal because she was “a Bangladeshi citizen by descent”.
It is understood that he has the right to Bangladeshi nationality through his mother.
SIAC, a semi-secret court handling national security cases, also said that while there were concerns about how Ms Begum could participate in the London proceedings, those difficulties did not mean that the Home Secretary’s decision should be reversed.
In his ruling Thursday, Lord Justice Flaux said: “It is difficult to conceive of a case in which a court or tribunal has said that we cannot hold a fair trial, but we will continue anyway.”
Government ‘shirked’ responsibilities
The human rights organization Liberty, which intervened on Ms. Begum’s appeal, welcomed the ruling, saying that the right to a fair trial was “a fundamental part of our justice system and that equal access to justice must apply to all. “
Liberty attorney Katie Lines added: “Banishing someone is the act of a government that shirks its responsibilities and it is critical that cruel and irresponsible government decisions can be properly challenged and overturned.”
Ms Begum left Bethnal Green, in East London, at age 15 to go to Syria in February 2015, with two friends from school.
Within a few days he had crossed the Turkish border and finally reached the IS headquarters in Raqqa, where he married a converted Dutch recruit. They had three children, all of whom have since died.
