The lead up to this been getting a lot of coverage in the British press. She travelled from the UK to Syria to join IS several years ago when she was 15, and has recently expressed a desire to...
The lead up to this been getting a lot of coverage in the British press. She travelled from the UK to Syria to join IS several years ago when she was 15, and has recently expressed a desire to return to the UK. She has also given several recent interviews where she shows little, if any, remorse or regret for her actions or those of the group she joined.
The decision to strip her of citizenship seems to be broadly popular, which I'm not especially surprised about, but I can't help but feel it would have been better all round to have her face a trial in the UK. The way it's been done raises some pretty serious legal questions about due process and about making her stateless, not to mention having all happened quickly and in absentia. From the other end of the spectrum, it is also open to accusations of "letting her get away with it" - the only consequences she faces for her actions are continuing to live where she chose to live in the first place (albeit in worse conditions than she may have been expecting).
I've also heard a few voices suggesting she be treated purely as a victim, due to her age. I can't say I'm personally a fan of that argument - voluntarily leaving a safe and stable environment to smuggle oneself into a warzone and support the fighters isn't an accident, and plenty of others her age are held legally responsible for their actions every day. Again, though, a trial would allow any mitigation to be fairly heard.
It seems far more reasonable to cast light on what she's done, and do so in an open, transparent, and scrupulously fair manner. And then, in the highly likely event that she is found guilty, she can face responsibility to the full extent of the law.
She's still only 19 and having heard her speak, she's not the sharpest tool in the shed. Her lack of remorse is clearly not going down particularly well but she's clearly immature and has been...
She's still only 19 and having heard her speak, she's not the sharpest tool in the shed. Her lack of remorse is clearly not going down particularly well but she's clearly immature and has been very much groomed to think the way she has expressed.
The issue I have with her being stripped of her British citizenship is she's going to be Bangladesh's problem, who have nothing to do with this whole situation. I'd be interested to see what they have to say about it.
Bangladesh's position is that she's not Bangladeshi and she isn't going to be, therefore she's not their problem and never was. I'm not a lawyer but it's my understanding that if this is the case...
I hate how many people seem to be happy with the exile of a teenager without trial. She might well be an awful person but innocent until proven guilty for goodness sakes. She certainly looks...
I hate how many people seem to be happy with the exile of a teenager without trial. She might well be an awful person but innocent until proven guilty for goodness sakes. She certainly looks guilty, although of what I'm not entirely clear - I haven't read anything to suggest she's committed any specific crimes other than being stupid and making bad decisions - but come on, due process is still a thing. Isn't it?
It seems the Home Office thought she had dual UK/Bangladeshi citizenship but that is in question. You'd hope they'd have done their homework to avoid stripping someone of their only citizenship...
It seems the Home Office thought she had dual UK/Bangladeshi citizenship but that is in question. You'd hope they'd have done their homework to avoid stripping someone of their only citizenship and leaving them stateless.
She's also hoping to gain Dutch citizenship because she's "married" to a Dutch jihadist (a convert, not from a Muslim background). But that idea doesn't fly well over here either. Besides, she and...
She's also hoping to gain Dutch citizenship because she's "married" to a Dutch jihadist (a convert, not from a Muslim background). But that idea doesn't fly well over here either. Besides, she and her "husband" have to prove that he's able to support her here in the Netherlands, while it's believed both are captured by Kurds. That boils down to: we know she's in a camp, but where he is is unknown to most.
Good luck trying to get in! (Seriously, I hope any attempts are failing from the start.)
What concerns me is what she's guilty of. I haven't heard anything to suggest she personally has committed any crimes. I mean yes, she certainly associated with criminals, but did she do anything...
What concerns me is what she's guilty of. I haven't heard anything to suggest she personally has committed any crimes. I mean yes, she certainly associated with criminals, but did she do anything herself?
Because if she didn't, we're stripping her of her citizenship because she thinks things we don't like and that's a really bad reason to do such a major thing. Even if she did, she should stand trial and I'm pretty sure there aren't any crimes which are punishable by freakin' exile.
She fucked up. Badly. She may have changed or, as seems more likely - she may still be a terrible person with awful opinions. But that is not a reason to take someone's citizenship. Especially when her only trial has been via media.
Took them how long, two days? Compare that to the whole medical cannabis thing with that epileptic kid. That went for weeks, and they still haven't really changed the law in any meaningful way.
Took them how long, two days?
Compare that to the whole medical cannabis thing with that epileptic kid. That went for weeks, and they still haven't really changed the law in any meaningful way.
The lead up to this been getting a lot of coverage in the British press. She travelled from the UK to Syria to join IS several years ago when she was 15, and has recently expressed a desire to return to the UK. She has also given several recent interviews where she shows little, if any, remorse or regret for her actions or those of the group she joined.
The decision to strip her of citizenship seems to be broadly popular, which I'm not especially surprised about, but I can't help but feel it would have been better all round to have her face a trial in the UK. The way it's been done raises some pretty serious legal questions about due process and about making her stateless, not to mention having all happened quickly and in absentia. From the other end of the spectrum, it is also open to accusations of "letting her get away with it" - the only consequences she faces for her actions are continuing to live where she chose to live in the first place (albeit in worse conditions than she may have been expecting).
I've also heard a few voices suggesting she be treated purely as a victim, due to her age. I can't say I'm personally a fan of that argument - voluntarily leaving a safe and stable environment to smuggle oneself into a warzone and support the fighters isn't an accident, and plenty of others her age are held legally responsible for their actions every day. Again, though, a trial would allow any mitigation to be fairly heard.
It seems far more reasonable to cast light on what she's done, and do so in an open, transparent, and scrupulously fair manner. And then, in the highly likely event that she is found guilty, she can face responsibility to the full extent of the law.
She's still only 19 and having heard her speak, she's not the sharpest tool in the shed. Her lack of remorse is clearly not going down particularly well but she's clearly immature and has been very much groomed to think the way she has expressed.
The issue I have with her being stripped of her British citizenship is she's going to be Bangladesh's problem, who have nothing to do with this whole situation. I'd be interested to see what they have to say about it.
Bangladesh's position is that she's not Bangladeshi and she isn't going to be, therefore she's not their problem and never was.
I'm not a lawyer but it's my understanding that if this is the case then Javid's decision to remove her citizenship is illegal as she's now stateless.
Good on Bangladesh. Javid is playing populist politics again.
I hate how many people seem to be happy with the exile of a teenager without trial. She might well be an awful person but innocent until proven guilty for goodness sakes. She certainly looks guilty, although of what I'm not entirely clear - I haven't read anything to suggest she's committed any specific crimes other than being stupid and making bad decisions - but come on, due process is still a thing. Isn't it?
It seems the Home Office thought she had dual UK/Bangladeshi citizenship but that is in question. You'd hope they'd have done their homework to avoid stripping someone of their only citizenship and leaving them stateless.
She's also hoping to gain Dutch citizenship because she's "married" to a Dutch jihadist (a convert, not from a Muslim background). But that idea doesn't fly well over here either. Besides, she and her "husband" have to prove that he's able to support her here in the Netherlands, while it's believed both are captured by Kurds. That boils down to: we know she's in a camp, but where he is is unknown to most.
Good luck trying to get in! (Seriously, I hope any attempts are failing from the start.)
What concerns me is what she's guilty of. I haven't heard anything to suggest she personally has committed any crimes. I mean yes, she certainly associated with criminals, but did she do anything herself?
Because if she didn't, we're stripping her of her citizenship because she thinks things we don't like and that's a really bad reason to do such a major thing. Even if she did, she should stand trial and I'm pretty sure there aren't any crimes which are punishable by freakin' exile.
She fucked up. Badly. She may have changed or, as seems more likely - she may still be a terrible person with awful opinions. But that is not a reason to take someone's citizenship. Especially when her only trial has been via media.
I don't like any of this.
The crowd are baying for blood or revenge. The home office have given them what they want.
Typical Tory tactics.
Took them how long, two days?
Compare that to the whole medical cannabis thing with that epileptic kid. That went for weeks, and they still haven't really changed the law in any meaningful way.