DOCSLIB.ORG

Revocation of British Citizenship—The Shamima Begum Case

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Revocation of British Citizenship—The Shamima Begum Case Revocation of British citizenship—the Shamima Begum case 26/02/2019 Immigration analysis: Philip Trott, partner, and Matthew James, solicitor, at Bates Wells Braithwaite, discuss the legal situation of Shamima Begum following her request to return to the UK. From a legal perspective, what are Shamima Begum’s options to challenge a revo- cation order, stripping British citizenship? Are there any alternative legal paths for her to return to the UK even without citizenship? In Shamima Begum’s (and other former ISIS members) case it is likely that the Home Secretary will certify that the revocation order was based on information which should not be made public, eg in the interests of national security. If this happens, an appeal can only be made to the Special Immigration Appeals Commis- sion (SIAC) and will be restricted to considering whether the decision was a lawful one. Shamima Begum will have 28 days from the date of the Home Secretary’s letter to file an appeal with the SIAC. Due to the nature of the evidence the Home Secretary will rely on, it is likely that the closed material procedure will be engaged. This means that Shamima Begum and her lawyer will not have access to all of the evidence on which the decision was based. Instead, a security-vetted Special Advocate will be appointed to represent her when this evidence is presented. This advocate cannot discuss this ‘secret’ evidence with her. In terms of returning to the UK, first and foremost Shamima Begum will encounter practical issues due to having no valid travel documents. An application under Immigration Rules, Appendix FM made on the basis of her being the parent of a British citizen son would require her son to be in the UK. Furthermore, a Zam- brano claim (Gerardo Ruiz Zambrano v Office national de l’emploi (ONEm), C-34/09), the Brexit issue aside, would only succeed if her son would be forced to leave the EEA area if residence rights were not granted to Shamima Begum. However, if Shamima Begum makes a claim on the basis of her child’s right to family life, the question of what is in the best interests of her child may be relevant. It is worth noting that any application by her is likely to be refused on suitability grounds. For the same reasons as the revocation order, such a de- cision will need to be appealed to the SIAC. Can British citizens be deprived of citizenship in this way? Under section 40 of the British Nationality Act 1981 (BNA 1981), any British citizen may be deprived of his or her citizenship if the Home Secretary is satisfied that it would be conducive to the public good to do so, and that they would not become stateless as a result. ‘Conducive to the public good’ means in the public interest on the grounds of involvement in terrorism, espio- nage, serious organised crime, war crimes or unacceptable behaviours. The UK government considers that deprivation on ‘conducive’ grounds is an appropriate response to activi- ties such as espionage, acts of terrorism directed at this country or an allied power, or expressing views which foment, justify or glorify terrorist violence in furtherance of particular beliefs. It follows that British citizenship can be deprived on the basis of their membership with a terrorist organisa- tion provided that the individual would not be left stateless (ie they were not a dual national). Where citizen- ship was obtained through naturalisation, the Home Secretary may deprive that person of their British citizen- ship if they are able to avoid remaining stateless. To do so, the Home Secretary would need reasonable grounds for believing that the individual is able to acquire (or reacquire) the citizenship of another country. RELX (UK) Limited, trading as LexisNexis®. Registered office 1-3 Strand London WC2N 5JR. Registered in England number 2746621. VAT Registered No. GB 730 8595 20. LexisNexis and the Knowledge Burst logo are registered trademarks of RELX Inc. © 2018 LexisNexis SA-SA-0918-035. The information in this email is current as of September 2018 and is subject to change without notice. The government has increasingly used these powers in order to ‘combat terrorism’. 2017 saw almost ten times the deprivations of 2016, the vast majority involving alleged terrorism. Do any of Shamima Begum’s personal circumstances, eg giving birth, leaving the UK at the age of 16, never visiting Bangladesh etc, have any impact on her legal sit- uation when it comes to challenging the order? An appeal to SIAC is restricted to considering whether the decision under challenge was a lawful one. This means that whether the judge thinks the decision was right or wrong does not factor in the appeal. For the decision to be lawful, the Home Secretary has to prove two things. Firstly, that Shamima Begum had involve- ment in terrorism or that her behaviour was otherwise unacceptable. Secondly, that it is in the public good to deprive her of status (which of course her personal circumstances will come into). It has been established since ZZ v Secretary of State for the Home Department C-300/11 that procedures before the SIAC are lawful, despite the use of closed material. However, the arbitrary denial or revocation of citizenship is capable of engaging Shamima Begum’s rights under Article 8 of the ECHR due to its impact on her private and family life and this is where Shamima Begum’s personal circumstances may have more of an impact on challenging the order. K2 v UK [2017] ECHR 238 laid out the two issues to be considered when determining such a decision’s ef- fect on an applicant’s Article 8 rights, namely: • whether the revocation of citizenship was arbitrary • the effect of the revocation for the applicant In K2 v UK, the applicant’s family were no longer living in the UK (and were able to join him in Sudan) so the deprivation was a justifiable interference with those rights. If the opposite is true in Shamima Begum’s case and if, as a result of the deprivation, she loses all meaningful contact with her family in the UK, she may be able to distinguish her case on those grounds and engage her Article 8 ECHR rights. The Home Secretary would then need to show that the deprivation was a justifiable interference of those rights under Article 8(2) ECHR. In contrast, the fact that Shamima Begum has never been to Bangladesh (and Bangladesh saying she is not a citizen) may not be enough to challenge the decision on the grounds of her being stateless (Abu Hamza v SSHD (SIAC, 5 November 2010)). The word ‘stateless’ in BNA 1981, s 40(4) refers to de jure stateless per- sons. Shamima Begum may be de facto stateless by virtue of having no Bangladeshi passport or recognition by the Bangladeshi authorities. However, if by virtue of Bangladeshi law and government practice she ob- tained the nationality automatically then she would not be de jure stateless and therefore still can be de- prived of her British citizenship. The issue may even come down to which country was able to legally deprive her of her nationality first (Pham v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2015] UKSC 19, [2015] 3 All ER 1015). Can Shamima Begum, if she enters the UK, be prosecuted under British criminal law or international criminal law? If yes, for what offences? Shamima Begum could be prosecuted under British criminal law as UK courts have extra-territorial jurisdic- tion over several terrorism offences committed outside the UK, including those listed below, provided the Crown Prosecution Service decides that: • there is sufficient evidence to provide a realistic prospect of conviction • the prosecution is in the public interest RELX (UK) Limited, trading as LexisNexis®. Registered office 1-3 Strand London WC2N 5JR. Registered in England number 2746621. VAT Registered No. GB 730 8595 20. LexisNexis and the Knowledge Burst logo are registered trademarks of RELX Inc. © 2018 LexisNexis SA-SA-0918-035. The information in this email is current as of September 2018 and is subject to change without notice. Potential offences under the Terrorism Act 2000 (TA 2000) and the Terrorism Act 2006 (TA 2006) include: • belonging to or professing to belong to ISIS, which is a proscribed organisation under TA 2000, s 11 • inviting support for ISIS (and the support is not, or is not restricted to, the provision of money or other property) • arranging, managing or assisting in managing a meeting in the knowledge that the meeting is to sup- port or further the activities of ISIS • wearing clothing or carrying or displaying articles in public in such a way as to arouse reasonable sus- picion that she is a member or supporter of ISIS (TA 2000, ss 12–13) • preparation of terrorist acts • providing or receiving training for preparing or commissioning acts of terrorism or assisting with this • attending a place used for terrorist training (TA 2006, ss 5, 6 and 8) Section 1 of the Counter-Terrorism and Border Security Act 2019 also amends TA 2000 to include the of- fence of expressing an opinion or belief that is supportive of a proscribed organisation, such as ISIS. Crimes within the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court include the crime of genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes and the crime of aggression. Document information Published Date 26 February 2019 FREE TRIAL Jurisdiction England; Northern Ireland; Scotland; Wales Interviewed by Kacper Zajac. The views expressed by our Legal Analysis interviewees are not necessarily those of the proprietor.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The ISIS Bride
    American University National Security Law Brief Volume 11 Issue 2 Article 4 2021 The Right of Return: The ISIS Bride Casey Hare-Osifchin Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.wcl.american.edu/nslb Part of the National Security Law Commons Recommended Citation Casey Hare-Osifchin "The Right of Return: The ISIS Bride," American University National Security Law Brief, Vol. 11, No. 2 (2021). Available at: https://digitalcommons.wcl.american.edu/nslb/vol11/iss2/4 This Response or Comment is brought to you for free and open access by the Washington College of Law Journals & Law Reviews at Digital Commons @ American University Washington College of Law. It has been accepted for inclusion in American University National Security Law Brief by an authorized editor of Digital Commons @ American University Washington College of Law. For more information, please contact [email protected]. The Right of Return: The ISIS Bride Casey Hare-Osifchin* ABSTRACT With the migration of Westerners to fight as a part of the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (“ISIS” or “ISIL”), there is an often-overlooked group of others who flock to the region in order to do what they consider to be their part. This is a group comprised of women, often extremely young, some even minors, who have felt compelled to fulfill their perceived duty to the Caliphate. They are usually branded ISIS brides. These girls and women are frequently radicalized online, and they subsequently travel to war-torn areas to be married to a member of ISIS and provide children for the Caliphate.
    [Show full text]
  • Nick Jones – Winning Entry
    Graham Turnbull essay competition 2019 Has the rule of law been replaced by the rule of politics? Nick Jones – winning entry Introduction Throughout his 2019 Reith Lectures, Jonathan Sumption advanced a case for the re- emergence of the political sphere, as a remedy to a British judicial system which has come to claim a “wider supervisory authority over other organs of the State.”1 Crucially, he placed legitimacy – “a vital but elusive concept […which] is still the basis of all consent”2 – at the very heart of his analysis. It is precisely the democratic legitimacy inherent to politics, he argued, that renders it a more appropriate decision-making vehicle than legal adjudication, particularly in the field of human rights. Whether Lord Sumption is correct on this latter point is not the primary focus of this essay (several substantive critiques have already emerged, including from his former Supreme Court colleague, Baroness Hale).3 However, his notion of legitimacy is absolutely central to conflicts between the “rule of the law” and the “rule of politics”, begging the question: what happens when they collide? This essay will seek to unravel this tension by arguing that the two concepts necessarily co-exist and, increasingly, conflict with one another. Far from being mutually exclusive, these two sources of legitimacy offer competing frames of reference justifying both governance, and the conferral or revocation of rights. Indeed, there is politics, on the one hand, and law, on the other: the key question is discerning which one “rules” when each is claimed as justification for opposing outcomes. Conceptual definitions Although thinkers from all standpoints have lauded the rule of law as a central tenet underpinning the liberal democratic model, a commonly held definition remains elusive.
    [Show full text]
  • 'Till Martyrdom Do Us Part': Gender and the ISIS Phenomenon
    ‘Till Martyrdom Do Us Part’ Gender and the ISIS Phenomenon erin marie saltman melanie smith About this paper This report represents the second publication in ISD’s Women and Extremism (WaE) programme, launched in January 2015 to fill a large blind spot in the evolution of the global extremist threat. This report also builds upon ICSR’s research into the foreign fighter phenomenonlxviii. Questions are now being posed as to how and why females are being recruited, what role they play within violent extremist organizations, and what tools will best work to counter this new threat. Yet very little work has been done to not only answer these questions but to build sustainable preventative measures. WaE serves to pioneer new research, develop global networks, seed local initiatives, and influence social media, in-line with work already being piloted by the ISD. About the authors Dr. Erin Marie Saltman is a Senior Researcher at ISD overseeing research and project development on Women and Extremism (WaE). WaE aims to fully analyse the radicalisation processes of women into violent extremist networks as well as increase the role women play in countering extremism. Erin’s background includes research and analysis work on both far-right and Islamist processes of radicalisation, political socialization and counter-extremism programmes. She regularly advises governments and security sectors across Europe and North America on issues related to online extremism and the role of the internet in radicalisation. Erin holds a PhD in political science from University College London. Melanie Smith is a Research Associate working on ISD’s WaE programme.
    [Show full text]
  • From Girls to Women
    NATIONAL UNIVERSITY IRELAND, GALWAY European Master’s Degree in Human Rights and Democratisation A.Y. 2018/2019 From Girls to Women Are (Minor) Female Foreign Fighters Child Soldiers or Jihadi Terrorist Brides? (A Legal Analysis of the United Kingdom’s and Aus- tria’s State Responses to this Phenomenon) Author: Mag. Tamara Siwczyk Supervisor: Dr. Kathleen Cavanaugh 1 Title: From Girls to Women Are (Minor) Female Foreign Fighters Child Soldiers or Jihadi Terrorist Brides? (A Legal Analysis of the United Kingdom’s and Austria’s State Responses to this Phenom- enon) Author: Mag. Tamara Siwczyk Course title: LLM in Human Rights and Democratisation Institution: Irish Centre for Human Rights National University of Ireland, Galway - NUI Galway Date: July 2019 Word Count: 27,058 Head of the Irish Centre for Human Rights: Prof. Siobhan Mullally Thesis supervisor: Dr. Kathleen Cavanaugh 2 Table of Content 1. Introduction 2. Historical and Political Backdrop to the Phenomenon of Foreign Fighters 2.1. Foreign Fighters in the Context of the Syrian Civil War 2.2. Inconsistent Terminology of the Phenomenon of Foreign Fighters 2.3. Numbers and Statistics of Foreign Fighters 2.4. The (Lack of) Gender Perspective on the Foreign Fighters Phenomenon 2.4.1. Female Foreign Fighters - Who are They and Why Do They Go? 2.4.2. ISIS’ Social Media Campaign and Gender-Tailored Approach to Attract Female Foreign Fighters 2.5. Children Foreign Fighters and the Cubs of the Caliphate - Who are the Children of ISIS and Why Do They Go? 2.5.1. Legal and Political Backdrop to the Classification of the Ongoing Conflict in Syria, Iraq and the Islamic State 2.5.2.
    [Show full text]
  • The Citizenship Hook: Obligations to British and French Foreign Fighters Under the European Convention on Human Rights
    Cite as Molinaro, 11 J. NAT’L SECURITY L. & POL’Y __ (forthcoming 2021) The Citizenship Hook: Obligations to British and French Foreign Fighters Under the European Convention on Human Rights Nicole E. Molinaro* INTRODUCTION………………………………………………………………………………….. 1 I. DOMESTIC LEGAL REGIMES…………………………………………………………... 3 A. The United Kingdom …………………………………………………………….. 4 1. Temporary Exclusion Orders ………………………………………….. 5 2. Denaturalization ……………………………………………………..… 6 B. France ……………………………………………………..…………………..… 8 II. THE EUROPEAN CONVENTION ON HUMAN RIGHTS – FUNDAMENTAL PROTECTIONS………………………………………………………. 10 A. The Right to Life ……………………………………………………………..… 10 1. Article 2: The Right to Life ………………………………………….. 10 2. Protocol Nos. 6 and 13: The Death Penalty………………………...… 11 B. Article 3: Prohibition of Torture, Cruel, Inhuman, and Degrading Treatment………………………………………………………….... 12 III. EXTRATERRITORIAL JURISDICTION OF THE EUROPEAN CONVENTION ON HUMAN RIGHTS………………………………………………………………….. 14 A. Current Bases for Extraterritorial Jurisdiction………………………………… 14 1. Violations by State Parties Outside of Their Territory……………….. 15 2. Risk of Violations by Third Parties ……………………………….…. 16 B. The Case for Extraterritorial Jurisdiction over French and British Foreign Fighters ……………………………………………………….. 17 1. French Foreign Fighters ……………………………………………… 18 2. British Foreign Fighters ……………………………………………… 20 IV. ADDITIONAL PROTOCOL 4: EXPANDING EXTRATERRITORIAL JURISDICTION FOR NATIONALS …………………………………………………………………………. 20 A. Article 3 of Additional Protocol No. 4: Prohibition of Expulsion
    [Show full text]
  • Submission to the United Nations Special Rapporteur On
    Submission to the United Nations Special Rapporteur on contemporary forms of slavery, including its causes and consequences in response to call for inputs on “The Nexus between Forced Displacement and Contemporary Forms of Slavery” ABOUT REPRIEVE Reprieve is a charitable organization registered in the United Kingdom (No. 1114900), and in special consultative status with the United Nations Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC). Reprieve provides free legal and investigative support to individuals who have been subjected to state-sponsored human rights abuses. Our clients belong to some of the most vulnerable populations in the world, as it is in their cases that human rights are most swiftly jettisoned, and the rule of law is cast aside. In particular, we protect the rights oF those Facing the death penalty and deliver justice to victims oF arbitrary detention, torture, and extrajudicial execution. SUMMARY Drawing on empirical research including Field reports and qualitative interviews, this submission presents evidence that British nationals held in Kurdish-run displacement camps in North East Syria (NES), the majority of whom are children, are at risk of slavery, trafficking and other forms of exploitation. This risk is exacerbated by UK policies towards its nationals in NES, namely the reFusal to repatriate or provide consular assistance, in addition to the government’s draconian use of citizenship deprivations. This submission will also reFlect on the gendered nature oF these policies and how British women in these displacement camps, many oF whom are survivors oF sex traFFicking, are at a pronounced and imminent risk of modern slavery. We conclude by offering recommendations on how the UK government can protect displaced persons in NES from contemporary forms of slavery.
    [Show full text]
  • 8.11 Isis Teen Bride
    FRIDAY, 15 FEBRUARY 2019 THEDAY.CO.UK ISIS teen bride begs for return to Britain Should she be allowed back? Four years ago, Shamima Begum fled Britain to join Islamic State. Now, with the caliphate in ruins, she wants to return. Her plea has caused division and uproar. Exodus:: Shamima Begum is one of 150 women and children to leave Britain for ISIS. “I’m not the same silly little 15-year-old saw my first severed head in a bin it didn’t faze 26-year-old Tareena Shaki became the first schoolgirl who ran away from Bethnal Green me at all. It was from a captured fighter seized British woman to be imprisoned after returning four years ago,” claims Shamima Begum — one on the battlefield, an enemy of Islam.” from Islamic State. of three schoolgirls who left their families in Around 850 people fled Britain to join up Should Shamima Begum be allowed to East London to join Islamic State (ISIS) in with the caliphate, including 150 women and return to Britain? 2015. children. Many died, but those who want to Now, with ISIS strongholds destroyed, and return present a dilemma for authorities. Homecomiing the terrorist group all but defeated, she wants “I’m not putting at risk British people’s lives This would be extremely controversial. Having to return to Britain. to go and look for terrorists or former terrorists chosen to renounce Britain for ISIS, many claim “The caliphate is over,” she told Anthony in a failed state,” declared security minister she must live with her choice — particularly Loyd — a Times journalist who found her in a Ben Wallace, saying that “actions have given her lack of regret.
    [Show full text]
  • Unequal Citizenship and Subjecthood: a Rose by Any Other Name..?
    Prabhat, D. (2020). Unequal Citizenship and Subjecthood: A rose by any other name..? . Northern Ireland Legal Quarterly, 71(2). https://nilq.qub.ac.uk/index.php/nilq/article/view/321 Peer reviewed version Link to publication record in Explore Bristol Research PDF-document This is the author accepted manuscript (AAM). The final published version (version of record) is available online via Queen's University Belfast at https://nilq.qub.ac.uk/index.php/nilq/article/view/321. Please refer to any applicable terms of use of the publisher. University of Bristol - Explore Bristol Research General rights This document is made available in accordance with publisher policies. Please cite only the published version using the reference above. Full terms of use are available: http://www.bristol.ac.uk/red/research-policy/pure/user-guides/ebr-terms/ Unequal Citizenship and Subjecthood: A rose by any other name..? 1 Devyani Prabhat University of Bristol Abstract British Citizenship is facing significant contemporary challenges in terms of failure to include ethnic minority citizens in an equal manner within the legal rights and protection of citizenship. Some examples of such failure are the hostile environment laws which have resulted in discrimination and deportation of citizens, new hurdles in becoming a citizen, and cancellation laws for conduct which have affect citizens with migrant connections more than those born British and holding only British nationality. This paper investigates why such legal inequalities persist by tracing modern day manifestations to the progress of law in this area from the days of subjecthood and Empire. It finds that, despite changes in nature of state and governance since days of Empire, contemporary British citizenship has inbuilt legal inequalities which persist from the time of subjecthood.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 Archived BBC Public Responses to Complaints
    Archived BBC public responses to complaints 2019 This Week, BBC One, 10 January 2019 Summary of complaint We received complaints from people who felt Owen Jones was treated in a disrespectful manner while appearing as a guest on the programme. Our response Following the verbal abuse which he and others had sustained from protesters outside Parliament, Owen Jones, journalist, left wing commentator and activist, used his “Take of the Week” section to give his personal take on the current state of political discourse, the rise of the far right and, as he deemed, the reasons for this. This is a prominent section of the programme in which the author gives their views unchallenged. During his video and the studio discussion which followed, Mr Jones made allegations about the Conservative Party and right wing media which some would consider contentious. As our audience would expect, Andrew scrutinised what Mr Jones said. Michael Portillo, who disagreed with Mr Jones, also gave his opinion. Mr Jones was given ample time to express his views and respond to points made to him. When Mr Jones made allegations about The Spectator magazine and Andrew’s role with the publication. Andrew legitimately pointed out that this was nothing to do with the BBC and it wasn’t right for Mr Jones to use the programme to make personal accusations against him. Today, BBC Radio 4, 26 January 2019 Summary of complaint We received a range of complaints following the interview of Helen McEntee. Some listeners felt the tone and content were not appropriate, suggesting a personal bias from the interviewer.
    [Show full text]
  • Citizenship Deprivation As a Counterterrorism Measure in Europe; Possible Follow-Up Scenarios, Human Rights Infringements and the Effect on Counterterrorism
    European Journal of Migration and Law 22 (2020) 338–365 brill.com/emil Citizenship Deprivation as a Counterterrorism Measure in Europe; Possible Follow-Up Scenarios, Human Rights Infringements and the Effect on Counterterrorism Maarten P. Bolhuis and Joris van Wijk Assistant Professor respectively Associate Professor, Center for International Criminal Justice, Department of Criminal Law and Criminology, Faculty of Law, VU University, Amsterdam, The Netherlands [email protected]; [email protected] Abstract The departure of substantial numbers of ‘foreign fighters’ and the occurrence of ter- rorist attacks on European soil have prompted renewed interest in citizenship depriva- tion as a policy measure. This article aims to contribute to the debate on its utility as a counterterrorism measure by examining recent developments in citizenship depriva- tion legislation and its use in Belgium, France, Germany, the Netherlands and the UK; discussing the wide array of possible scenarios that may follow after an individual is deprived of citizenship; and analysing to what extent the various outcomes are in- strumental in countering terrorism. It concludes that most of the outcomes are prob- lematic from a human rights perspective, or counterproductive in the fight against terrorism as they may cause further marginalisation and radicalisation and can play into the hands of terrorist groups, may cause people to disappear from the radar, and may undermine crucial international cooperation. Keywords citizenship deprivation – foreign fighters – counterterrorism – deportation – statelessness – radicalisation – legal limbo © Maarten P. Bolhuis and Joris van Wijk, 2020 | doi:10.1163/15718166-12340079 This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the CC BY-NCDownloaded 4.0 license.
    [Show full text]
  • Begum -V- Home Secretary Judgment
    SPECIAL IMMIGRATION APPEALS COMMISSION Appeal No:SC/163/2019 Hearing Dates: 22-25 October 2019 Date of Judgment: rn February 2020 Before THE HONOURABLE MRS JUSTICE ELISABETH LAING UPPER TRIBUNAL JUDGE BLUM MR ROGER GOLLAND Between Shamima Begum Appellant and THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENT Respondent OPEN JUDGMENT Mr T Hickman QC and Ms Jones (instructed by Birnberg Pierce & Solicitors) appeared on behalf of the Appellant Mr J Glasson QC & Mr Blundell (instructed by the Government Legal Department) appeared on Behalf of the Secretary of State Mr A McCullough QC & Mr Straw (instructed by Special Advocates' Support Office) appeared as Special Advocates OPEN judgment Introduction 1. The Appellant (' A') has appealed against a decision of the Secretary of State dated i 9 February 2019 to make an order depriving her of her British citizenship ('Decision I'). That appeal is governed by section 2B of the Special Immigration Appeals Commission Act 1997 ('the 1997 Act'). She has also appealed against the Secretary of State's decision dated 13 June 2019 to refuse her application for leave to enter (' L TE') outside the Immigration Rules (HC 395 as amended) ('the Rules') in order to enable her to pursue her appeal effectively ('Decision 2'). That appeal is governed by section 2 ofthe 1997 Act. 2. This is our decision after a preliminary issues hearing in this case. If we decide any one of the preliminary issues in favour of A, her appeal will, potentially, succeed. We have nonetheless considered and decided each ofthe preliminary issues. 3. There are three issues.
    [Show full text]
  • The Case of Shamima Begum Written by Mercedes Masters and Salvador Santino F
    Citizenship Revocation as a Human Rights Violation: The Case of Shamima Begum Written by Mercedes Masters and Salvador Santino F. Regilme Jr. This PDF is auto-generated for reference only. As such, it may contain some conversion errors and/or missing information. For all formal use please refer to the official version on the website, as linked below. Citizenship Revocation as a Human Rights Violation: The Case of Shamima Begum https://www.e-ir.info/2020/11/28/citizenship-revocation-as-a-human-rights-violation-the-case-of-shamima-begum/ MERCEDES MASTERS AND SALVADOR SANTINO F. REGILME JR., NOV 28 2020 Is it morally legitimate for a state to revoke the citizenship under certain conditions? Should a state revoke the citizenship of its nationals who joined a publicly known non-state terrorist organisation abroad? Although the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights affirms that “all human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights” (United Nations 1948), there is a wide variation on how states respect the inherent dignity of all individuals within its territory. In the contemporary international system, states remain the primary legal guarantor of human rights (Regilme 2019a; Regilme 2020). State-based citizenship constitutes the quintessential entry pass for a human individual to enjoy a wide variety of rights and privileges that are only possible through formal membership in a legitimate, territorially-bound political community. For that reason, citizenship revocation and statelessness have lethal effects upon human individuals. The absence of formal membership in a political community concretely means cutting off access to various tools for survival — sense of belongingness as well as material means of livelihood, amongst many others.
    [Show full text]