DISCO4.COM - View topic

RRSTDV8

Member Since: 07 Apr 2014
Location: Here
Posts: 13107

I agree Moo.

The issue has raised an important point - that Government is happy to play very close to the wind, legally, to keep its base happy. The SoS's decision was predicated on the thinnest of reasons - that Begum could get citizenship elsewhere even though the country in question said otherwise.

It is absolutely essential that Government complies with the law in all its dealings. Otherwise we end up with a country like Russia where those at the top do as they please. Visiting from rrsport.co.uk
2012 RRS SDV6
2008 RRS TDV8
"When you fire that first shot, no matter how right you feel, you have no idea who's going to die! You don't know who's children are going to scream and burn. How many hearts will be broken. How many lives shattered. How much blood will spill, until everybody does what they were always going to have to do from the very beginning: SIT DOWN AND TALK!"

3rd Mar 2023 10:58 am

pjm-84

Member Since: 04 Oct 2016
Location: Hampshire
Posts: 2438

I would tend to disagree. People know how to play the system and in some instances a decision needs to be undertaken without the politics and pandering associated with the legal system, as can be seen by the failed numerous appeals (how many years , how many arguments, typically with some emotional attachment?)

The SOS would have taken legal advice at the highest level, and this would be independent from politics and pandering. That said, I do believe that the original decision to remove was probably political and probably pandering as I struggle to see a significant threat with SB.

All I am concerned with is the law and that the decision to remove citizenship was legally undertaken. I don't care why. That's not my prerogative. If it was illegally done I would be demanding that she is returned and stands trial here via our legal system and all the right afforded by our legal system.

None of the grounds to appeal this decision, that I've seen, mentions this without an emotional attachment. Whilst you can have mitigation it doesn't change the rule of law.

3rd Mar 2023 11:47 am

LT

Member Since: 31 Dec 2005
Location: South West
Posts: 23368

2016 Discovery 4 3.0 TDV6 Landmark LE Auto Santorini Black

^ Not according to Begum’s defence:

“There is nothing in any of the home secretary’s evidence which suggests that consideration was given – prior to the deprivation decision being taken, or indeed at any time – to matters relating to de facto citizenship,” Squires said in submissions.

These matters included whether Begum would be recognised by Bangladesh as a citizen and provided with any protection or practical support, he said.

“The home secretary has not responded to the allegation that the decision-maker neither directed his mind to this issue, nor took steps such as contacting the Bangladeshi authorities to find out their position regarding the appellant,”

Had such inquiries been carried out, “the Bangladesh authorities would have confirmed that the appellant would be hanged if she entered the country,” Squires said.

He added: “This was their stark position in respect of the appellant as set out in the public statements of the Bangladeshi authorities immediately after the decision was taken.”

Source:
https://amp.theguardian.com/uk-news/2022/n...ourt-hears

So if the SoS had been properly advised, he’d have known that Begum was not a Bangladeshi citizen A’s confirmed by Bangladesh and what’s more as a suspected terrorist, under Bangladeshi law it was likely that she would be hung.

If accurate and the cynic in me tends to believe it may well be, the SoS and advisers made a rushed decision, albeit one that would be politically popular (as proven by some of the posts on this thread).

It strikes me that the government is now not prepared to back down and admit that they messed up and breached international law. Which again, is politically popular with their supporters. 2006 D3 HSE (Original & still the best)-GONE
2010 D4 HSE (A bit bling)-GONE
2014 D4 HSE (Almost too bling)-GONE
2015 D4 HSE (A heated what?)-GONE
2016 D4 Landmark (Written Off)-GONE
2016 D4 Landmark (Surely the last!) PD1881 rims-GONE
2017 FFRR SDV8 Autobiography

3rd Mar 2023 12:27 pm

pjm-84

Member Since: 04 Oct 2016
Location: Hampshire
Posts: 2438

Hence Begum's defence has lost the argument.

If the argument or grounds was sufficient in law then they would have been upheld. All grounds have failed and that is mentioned in the 76pages within the open document summary.

Quote:

In brief, the SIAC says it considered and analysed a vast amount of material for the appeal and it was unable to conclude that the Home Secretary erred in any material respect when deciding to strip Shamima Begum of her British citizenship. Begum's appeal was dismissed on all grounds. The case was one of "great concern and difficulty" for the Commission, with challenging legal issues and finely balanced judgments on the essential questions.

The SIAC noted that its role was confined to an examination of whether there was a proper basis in fact and in law for the Home Secretary's decision, and it was not the role of the SIAC to effectively overrule the Government's view on threats to national security.

3rd Mar 2023 12:47 pm

pjm-84

Member Since: 04 Oct 2016
Location: Hampshire
Posts: 2438

Really got to stress this

Quote:
The SIAC noted that its role was confined to an examination of whether there was a proper basis in fact and in law for the Home Secretary's decision,....

The conclusion is yes there was. Forget the motive for it, or security threat etc. Did the HS / SOS act within the law...

3rd Mar 2023 12:50 pm

LT

Member Since: 31 Dec 2005
Location: South West
Posts: 23368

^We are told that international law states and I’m quoting from your post:

“4. British citizenship is not an absolute entitlement for everyone. It can be removed by the
Secretary of State, but not if to do so would render the subject stateless.”

Hence why even right wing figures in the Conservative Party are speaking out against this. 2006 D3 HSE (Original & still the best)-GONE
2010 D4 HSE (A bit bling)-GONE
2014 D4 HSE (Almost too bling)-GONE
2015 D4 HSE (A heated what?)-GONE
2016 D4 Landmark (Written Off)-GONE
2016 D4 Landmark (Surely the last!) PD1881 rims-GONE
2017 FFRR SDV8 Autobiography

3rd Mar 2023 2:07 pm

pjm-84

Member Since: 04 Oct 2016
Location: Hampshire
Posts: 2438

I agree with that LT. Hence the ruling has been upheld.

Quote:
It can be removed by the
Secretary of State, but not if to do so would render the subject stateless. Many citizens
of the United Kingdom are immune from deprivation action for that reason, but not Ms
Begum.

The answer is above. Again the grounds made by the defense on the deprivation are emotional and I can find no argument against the above.

3rd Mar 2023 3:26 pm

RRSTDV8

Member Since: 07 Apr 2014
Location: Here
Posts: 13107

Begum is the citizen of no country. She is stateless. Making someone stateless is against UK law. That's the worry for some of us - if the UK Govt can breach its own laws so publicly, then how safe are any of us in the future? What other laws might they be happy to breach in order to keep the baying masses in their Party (and the Tory-aligned press) happy?

Cicero had somethings to say that are pertinent, I think:

Quote:
We are slaves of the law so that we may be able to be free.

Quote:
A community is as those who rule it.

The rule of law is essential to a free society and a Government that wishes to govern a free society must abide by the law or society will itself be lawless. Visiting from rrsport.co.uk
2012 RRS SDV6
2008 RRS TDV8
"When you fire that first shot, no matter how right you feel, you have no idea who's going to die! You don't know who's children are going to scream and burn. How many hearts will be broken. How many lives shattered. How much blood will spill, until everybody does what they were always going to have to do from the very beginning: SIT DOWN AND TALK!"

3rd Mar 2023 3:40 pm

pjm-84

Member Since: 04 Oct 2016
Location: Hampshire
Posts: 2438

Quote:
Begum is the citizen of no country. She is stateless.

Very easy case to win in UK law then......

If you chose to make yourself stateless or the state that you had a birth right to by a 1951 Act decides not to honour that ....... different matter. Similarly if you accept that right to citizenship and face hanging or persecution / discrimination...... different matter

3rd Mar 2023 4:00 pm

pjm-84

Member Since: 04 Oct 2016
Location: Hampshire
Posts: 2438

It does sort of make sense now why she is not allowed to travel to the UK for the appeals.

I suspect on arrival she will claim Bangladesh Citizenship under her birth right and then claim asylum. (Which is perfectly legal for her to do so)

3rd Mar 2023 4:05 pm

RRSTDV8

Member Since: 07 Apr 2014
Location: Here
Posts: 13107

Yes, she could do that. And no doubt any such an attempt would be thrown out and she would be deported to Rwanda forthwith.

Part of me feels sorry for her. I don't think she really had any idea what she was getting herself in to when she and her friends went to Syria. Yes, no doubt there were romantic notions of building a nation out of the ruins of a war-torn region, but lots of people do stupid things for ostensibly reasonable reasons. She's likely to now have to pay for that mistake for the rest of her life. Seems a bit harsh to me. If she'd committed murder in the UK she'd have had a few years in prison and then would be able to rebuild what life she could. As it is, she is now in limbo indefinitely. Visiting from rrsport.co.uk
2012 RRS SDV6
2008 RRS TDV8
"When you fire that first shot, no matter how right you feel, you have no idea who's going to die! You don't know who's children are going to scream and burn. How many hearts will be broken. How many lives shattered. How much blood will spill, until everybody does what they were always going to have to do from the very beginning: SIT DOWN AND TALK!"

3rd Mar 2023 4:19 pm

LT

Member Since: 31 Dec 2005
Location: South West
Posts: 23368

pjm-84 wrote:

I suspect on arrival she will claim Bangladesh Citizenship under her birth right and then claim asylum. (Which is perfectly legal for her to do so)

My understanding, and I am not saying that it is correct, is that Begum could have applied for Bangladeshi dual nationality or even sole citizenship up to the age of 21, under a technicality due to her parents heritage.

She did NOT do so and now she is 23.

So to claim citizenship under “birthright” would not be admissible??? 2006 D3 HSE (Original & still the best)-GONE
2010 D4 HSE (A bit bling)-GONE
2014 D4 HSE (Almost too bling)-GONE
2015 D4 HSE (A heated what?)-GONE
2016 D4 Landmark (Written Off)-GONE
2016 D4 Landmark (Surely the last!) PD1881 rims-GONE
2017 FFRR SDV8 Autobiography

3rd Mar 2023 4:42 pm

RRSTDV8

Member Since: 07 Apr 2014
Location: Here
Posts: 13107

No, the bit about 21 years of age is that is the cut off for dual nationality. She would have Bangladeshi nationality by descent up until she was 21 irrespective of having other nationality. Once she attained 21 years of age, she would have to drop her citizenship of another country in order for her Bangladeshi citizenship to continue.

Because the SoS removed her British citizenship before her 21st birthday (I wonder if that was done on purpose or was just a coincidence), her Bangladeshi descent-acquired citizenship would continue. Bangladesh could revoke her citizenship as there is nothing in the 1951 act about making someone stateless as there is in UK legislation. Visiting from rrsport.co.uk
2012 RRS SDV6
2008 RRS TDV8
"When you fire that first shot, no matter how right you feel, you have no idea who's going to die! You don't know who's children are going to scream and burn. How many hearts will be broken. How many lives shattered. How much blood will spill, until everybody does what they were always going to have to do from the very beginning: SIT DOWN AND TALK!"

3rd Mar 2023 5:18 pm

pjm-84

Member Since: 04 Oct 2016
Location: Hampshire
Posts: 2438

.....interesting legal argument there.

I think she could claim asylum and I think the Bangladeshi government would be forthcoming to facilitate this.......

Recent arguments amount to persecution and hanging if she went to Bangladesh so the implication would be that this "route" is still available.

3rd Mar 2023 5:29 pm

LT

Member Since: 31 Dec 2005
Location: South West
Posts: 23368

I read it, perhaps incorrectly, that should she step foot on Bangladesh territory, she would be tried for terrorism with the death penalty if found guilty.

The Bangladeshi government has declared Shamima Begum is not a Bangladeshi citizen and that (in their opinion) she is a British citizen by birth and has never applied for dual nationality with Bangladesh.

The Bangladeshi foreign minister, Shahrial Alam, has publicly stated that there is no question of her being allowed to enter into Bangladesh.

Which again begs the question of the legality of the SoS's decision. 2006 D3 HSE (Original & still the best)-GONE
2010 D4 HSE (A bit bling)-GONE
2014 D4 HSE (Almost too bling)-GONE
2015 D4 HSE (A heated what?)-GONE
2016 D4 Landmark (Written Off)-GONE
2016 D4 Landmark (Surely the last!) PD1881 rims-GONE
2017 FFRR SDV8 Autobiography

3rd Mar 2023 5:58 pm