Shabina Begum can come back to UK

Status
Not open for further replies.
Sponsored Links
Shamima Begum..
Allowed back in order to fight the decision of stripping her of citizenship. Nothing yet of Isis crimes.
 
Sponsored Links
The court has simply recognised that under international law, which the UK has signed up to, it is illegal to make a person stateless.

This will now have to be proved to be the case or not, although I see the government are to appeal.

To the supreme court and if needs be to the ECJ - how ironic is that!

If charges are to be brought, then they should be heard in a UK court.
 
Should never be allowed back as none should that have followed this path.
 
The court has simply recognised that under international law, which the UK has signed up to, it is illegal to make a person stateless.

This will now have to be proved to be the case or not, although I see the government are to appeal.

To the supreme court and if needs be to the ECJ - how ironic is that!

If charges are to be brought, then they should be heard in a UK court.

This is about her ability to properly represent her challenge, not whether the Home Secretary acted lawfully. This has already been determined.
Either way it looks like the govt have other cards to play. This is a way for her to get back to the UK as part of her attempt to change the law via judicial review. Her legal team know full well that once here we are stuck with her either way. I suspect she will be shortly arrested by "local" law enforcement, preventing her from travelling.
 
If charges are to be brought, then they should be heard in a UK court.
But the crimes were not committed in the UK as far as I know.. so why should they be done here?

She can have citizenship overseas on her mothers side. Was she made stateless? Or was it just that Bangladesh didn't want her either?
 
But the crimes were not committed in the UK as far as I know.. so why should they be done here?

She can have citizenship overseas on her mothers side. Was she made stateless? Or was it just that Bangladesh didn't want her either?
She didn't, at the time, have citizenship of any other country. The UK argued she could apply for citizenship of another country. So she was, in effect, made stateless.
The UK had no guarantee that she would be successful in her application for another country.
 
So is being a member of a terrorist group.
Ah, people, if only they took these things into account...
If a person breaks the law, they can be arrested, charged and if found guilty, penalised. If their crime was against international law, they could be arrested and charged in any country.
What happens when a nation breaks international law? What is the rule of law worth under that scenario?
 
She didn't, at the time, have citizenship of any other country. The UK argued she could apply for citizenship of another country. So she was, in effect, made stateless.
The UK had no guarantee that she would be successful in her application for another country.

I don't believe that is correct. I believe she was entitled to citizenship because of her age and heritage. No concept of her being denied under their laws.. apparently.

If a person breaks the law, they can be arrested, charged and if found guilty, penalised. If their crime was against international law, they could be arrested and charged in any country.
What happens when a nation breaks international law? What is the rule of law worth under that scenario?

you're making it up - "international law" lol. what are you on about? :D

@sodthisforfun fwiw - there can be crimes that would apply both here and where she currently is - anti terrorism legislation covers her actions from a UK law perspective.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Sponsored Links
Back
Top