should she be allowed back in the UK?

[woody69]

This feels like political manoeuvring to me on the part of Javid considering the Tory leadership elections that will be happening at some point in the near future and this Twitter thread with the thoughts of a Barrister backs that up -

https://twitter.com/x/status/1098138818954317824

, particularly the bit where he says, "Javid can argue, as many a Home Secretary has (including our current PM) that he made the right call and if he loses in the court it’s: - the judge’s fault. - even worse, the Human Rights Act’s/European Convention on Human Rights fault. Rule of law? Pah. "

 

[Dibby]

Apparently under Dutch law, children take the nationality of the father, ergo this child is Dutch.

So the child likely has multiple nationalities - Dutch, British (depending on when her nationality was revoked) and Bangladeshi. That could be potentially a lot of legal wrangling to sort out if both grandparents want control of the child.

 

[SocketRocket]

So the child likely has multiple nationalities - Dutch, British (depending on when her nationality was revoked) and Bangladeshi. That could be potentially a lot of legal wrangling to sort out if both grandparents want control of the child.

Why can't she take the child to Bangladesh with her.

 

[HomerJSimpson]

Surely this muddys the waters https://news.sky.com/story/is-teen-...british-citizen-suggests-sajid-javid-11642889

I understand how a baby born to British citizen would get that right but having revoked the mothers British citizenship would that still apply?

 

[williamalex1]

Surely the government learned something from the Abu Hamza fiasco.

 

[bobmac]

The one good thing about this is the baby will have no memories about all this

 

[woody69]

Surely the government learned something from the Abu Hamza fiasco.

Completely different circumstances and unrelated. What would you expect them to learn?

 

[Bunkermagnet]

The one good thing about this is the baby will have no memories about all this

Don't you mean every opportunity of being fed lies and stories?

 

[williamalex1]

Completely different circumstances and unrelated. What would you expect them to learn?

Didn't take them forever to get him out and cost a fortune in legal stuff if i remember correctly.

 

[Lord Tyrion]

Didn't take them forever to get him out and cost a fortune in legal stuff if i remember correctly.

Correct. I think it's a decent comparison. A politician making a populist decision but without checking the legality of it first, or at best gambling on the legality of it. Wanting to do something and legally being able to do something are not always the same. Home Secretaries should know this and be a little more cautious.

 

[Hobbit]

Bangladesh have said no she isn't.

 

[Deleted member 15344]

Is anyone really surprised

You would have thought before making sure a crucial decision they would make sure of everything but it appears the Home Secretary has made an emotional reactionary decision

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp....of-shamima-begums-son-not-affected-says-javid

 

[Hobbit]

Is anyone really surprised

You would have thought before making sure a crucial decision they would make sure of everything but it appears the Home Secretary has made an emotional reactionary decision

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp....of-shamima-begums-son-not-affected-says-javid

Not surprised by it. Interested to see how this plays out.

The Bangladesh's own Gov website states that a person has Bangladeshi status by birthright. They don't have to apply for it. One thing's for sure, it'll certainly make Bangladesh beef up their rules.

 

[Foxholer]

Re-arrange the following....

brewery! couldn't in Government organize This p-up a!

PS. I've done it - twice!

 

[larmen]

For anyone who speaks German, Bild.de (German Sun/ Daily mail) is running a story about a German woman that has returned from isis. Going on for a few days now, but it is behind a paywall, I think.

 

[Lord Tyrion]

Bangladesh have said no she isn't.

I don't think the British government had to say she had Bangladeshi citizenship, it just has to show she could have it. They are right. Her baby was born in Syria yet it is classed as British due to her mother. She is British but could be Bangladeshi due to her parents. Very similar to the many Brits who are now deciding to obtain Irish passports despite never having been there. It's partly a theoretical issue.

 

[Deleted member 15344]

Not surprised by it. Interested to see how this plays out.

The Bangladesh's own Gov website states that a person has Bangladeshi status by birthright. They don't have to apply for it. One thing's for sure, it'll certainly make Bangladesh beef up their rules.

It all seemed very rushed through by the Home Office and quite clearly seemed a decision made by one person on the back of some emotional uprising- it seemed a decision looking for good PR but it’s quite clearly a very poor ill thought out move from the Home Office that looks like it’s back firing and just heaping more embarrassment on a government that is already losing the trust of the public.

It’s just poor - the Justice Sec and MI6 even said it’s not something that could be done and now the laughing stock just increases. They have prob made the young girls stance even stronger now

 

[Hobbit]

It all seemed very rushed through by the Home Office and quite clearly seemed a decision made by one person on the back of some emotional uprising- it seemed a decision looking for good PR but it’s quite clearly a very poor ill thought out move from the Home Office that looks like it’s back firing and just heaping more embarrassment on a government that is already losing the trust of the public.

It’s just poor - the Justice Sec and MI6 even said it’s not something that could be done and now the laughing stock just increases. They have prob made the young girls stance even stronger now

Really? You know it was rushed? You were party to the discussions between the various barristers, the Attorney General and the Home Office/Secretary? You think people at that level make emotional decisions? Its a PR exercise? Sounds like your banging a drum rather than being measured and considerate.

Lets dial it back a little and ask a few questions before jumping to (absurd?) conclusions. Which will prove difficult as we only have a very rudimentary idea of the facts.

At first "we knew" she is(was?) a UK citizen. And "we knew" International law clearly states that someone can't be made stateless from one country if she doesn't have dual citizenship. Guess what? That's all "we know."

It would appear, so we've been told, that she has a Bangladeshi mother. BTW, Its not been denied. Bangladeshi law appears to say that if you have a Bangladeshi parent you have Bangladeshi citizenship due to Jus Sanguinis - their words on their website, i.e. by birthright. Apparently, that birthright extends till they are 21 years of age, at which time they have to formally apply for it, if they don't live in Bangladesh. As an aside, that's to protect their birthright until they are of an age to make their own decision.

With the resources at the disposal of the Home Office, and no doubt from investigations made when she first left, they will know that she has Bangladeshi parents. They will know what rights a child of Bangladeshi parents has in terms of citizenship, both in the UK and in Bangladesh.

This isn't a difficult equation to put together based on what we've been told. And if the circumstances surrounding Bangladeshi citizenship are true, what has the Home Sec got wrong?

Where this may unravel is the precedent already set by accepting so many IS supporters back into the country, no doubt some of which have dual citizenship. And lets not forget, the Home Office has already had its fingers burned by revoking citizenship for 2 returning IS supporters only to be told by the International court they had it wrong. Do you think they'll make the same mistake twice? If you do, can you give me the lottery numbers...

She's also spoken of acquiring Dutch citizenship. To do that she needs to have been married to her Dutch husband for more than 3 years(tick) AND resided in the Netherlands for 3 years uninterrupted(cross). She doesn't qualify on the second count.

 

[Deleted member 15344]

Really? You know it was rushed? You were party to the discussions between the various barristers, the Attorney General and the Home Office/Secretary? You think people at that level make emotional decisions? Its a PR exercise? Sounds like your banging a drum rather than being measured and considerate.

Maybe actually read what I said - “It seemed rushed

Lets dial it back a little and ask a few questions before jumping to (absurd?) conclusions. Which will prove difficult as we only have a very rudimentary idea of the facts.

At first "we knew" she is(was?) a UK citizen. And "we knew" International law clearly states that someone can't be made stateless from one country if she doesn't have dual citizenship. Guess what? That's all "we know."

It would appear, so we've been told, that she has a Bangladeshi mother. BTW, Its not been denied. Bangladeshi law appears to say that if you have a Bangladeshi parent you have Bangladeshi citizenship due to Jus Sanguinis - their words on their website, i.e. by birthright. Apparently, that birthright extends till they are 21 years of age, at which time they have to formally apply for it, if they don't live in Bangladesh. As an aside, that's to protect their birthright until they are of an age to make their own decision.

With the resources at the disposal of the Home Office, and no doubt from investigations made when she first left, they will know that she has Bangladeshi parents. They will know what rights a child of Bangladeshi parents has in terms of citizenship, both in the UK and in Bangladesh.

This isn't a difficult equation to put together based on what we've been told. And if the circumstances surrounding Bangladeshi citizenship are true, what has the Home Sec got wrong?

Where this may unravel is the precedent already set by accepting so many IS supporters back into the country, no doubt some of which have dual citizenship. And lets not forget, the Home Office has already had its fingers burned by revoking citizenship for 2 returning IS supporters only to be told by the International court they had it wrong. Do you think they'll make the same mistake twice? If you do, can you give me the lottery numbers...

She's also spoken of acquiring Dutch citizenship. To do that she needs to have been married to her Dutch husband for more than 3 years(tick) AND resided in the Netherlands for 3 years uninterrupted(cross). She doesn't qualify on the second count.

I don’t think any of that changes my point

Simple solution - Home Office to Bangladesh Government - “ can we Check that this girl is actually a Bangladesh Citizen “ . Nope it “appears” the Home Office have gone stumbling ahead without completing checking things and I believe it’s not the first time they have done something like this.

The Home Secretary stated he would remove her UK Citizenship- other people within the government and security services warned that it couldn’t be done easily - Home Office went and did it anyway

Do I believe the Home Office would make a mistake again - yep most certainly, and I expect they will continue to make mistakes , seems it’s just part and parcel of the current government

It’s seems from what the Bangladesh Government have said the Home Office clearly didn’t investigate enough or knew enough to make the decision they did and right now the embarrassment is squarely with the UK

 

[Hobbit]

Maybe actually read what I said - “It seemed rushed



I don’t think any of that changes my point

Simple solution - Home Office to Bangladesh Government - “ can we Check that this girl is actually a Bangladesh Citizen “ . Nope it “appears” the Home Office have gone stumbling ahead without completing checking things and I believe it’s not the first time they have done something like this.

The Home Secretary stated he would remove her UK Citizenship- other people within the government and security services warned that it couldn’t be done easily - Home Office went and did it anyway

Do I believe the Home Office would make a mistake again - yep most certainly, and I expect they will continue to make mistakes , seems it’s just part and parcel of the current government

It’s seems from what the Bangladesh Government have said the Home Office clearly didn’t investigate enough or knew enough to make the decision they did and right now the embarrassment is squarely with the UK

I saw the "seemed." Did you not see the question mark and the end of "you know it was rushed?"

The Home Office doesn't have to check with the Bangladeshi Govt. Her parents, and their solicitor, haven't denied they are Bangladeshi. And, as I said, the Bangladeshi govt website makes it pretty clear. And the reason the previous 2 Bangladeshi IS supporters got the UK citizenship reinstated is they were over 21 when the UK tried to revoke their citizenship.

As for the Home Office will make mistakes again. I prefer to deal in facts, not suppositions, that support an argument.

You believe the UK govt has been embarrassed by their (supposed) haste and lack of due diligence. I don't. Although I do believe there is a possibility it may unravel due to a precedent already set.