Terrorists losing British Citizenship

[hellenbackagen]

Why is this news? Stripping terrorists of citizenship?

Surely the day a person decides they are happy to kill or maim their citizens in the name of terrorism they have lost their right to stake a claim to that citizenship?

This isn't a loss of their human rights. They forgo that when they choose to rob others of their human rights surely?

Fuck off and be a citizen of the people you support.

How many of you thinking we should have the terrorists back shed a tear when they heard jihadi John was killed by a drone? Felt sorry for a poor innocent British citizen who got in with the wrong crowd and was led astray?

Or like me, did you sigh with relief and thank goodness that there was one less evil bastard on the planet?

As far as I am concerned Begum and Letts fall into the same group.

The issue is that a nationality is supposedly a human right. But most human rights are considered derogatable go an extent in the event of criminality. I don’t think ‘vulnerability’ is relevant. Most people who are poor/young/mentally ill don’t go about killing people indiscriminately.

Namenic, her family use to take her to hate speeches and encouraged the behaviour. No chance of her getting de radicalised around her family.

There was another girl from London with a very similar name and it is she who was taken to hate speeches. The two are often mixed up on threads like these.

I am two minds over this.
In the case of Jack Letts, I understand he had dual nationality, British and Canadian, so although he was born here, and brought up here, then technically his British nationality can be revoked.
In the case of Shamima Begum, her father is Bangladeshi, and apparently lives there, so although she did not have dual nationality, she is apparently entitled to claim Bangladeshi nationality.
However, the authorities in Bangladesh can rightly claim that they did not know this, had never heard of her etc. I therefore think the legal side of things may be a bit dubious.
Being female and not actively fighting, it may be more difficult to prove a criminal offence had taken place.
On the other hand, I understand she left the country on someone else’s passport, so if she ever returns, they should be able to prosecute for travelling under a false name, etc as the first offence, before prosecuting for anything else.
As an aside, were her parents / mother fined for her being absent from school?

So what about all the Brits serving sentences in countries with abysmal human rights and prison conditions? I don't hear any clamour for them to be brought home for trial and sentencing.

Remember Nazanin Zaghari-Ratcliffe? Still held in Iran.

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-49074939

What about all these Britons?

www.express.co.uk/news/uk
/1133719/british-citizens-prison-abroad-iran-dubai-egypt-Nazanin-Zaghari-Ratcliffe-foreign-office

So what about all the Brits serving sentences in countries with abysmal human rights and prison conditions

Commit a crime in a country, you do the time in that country.

What should happen to you after the sentence if the country doesn't want you there? You should go back to your own country.

Jack's parents are currently serving a sudpended sentence for funding terrorism. I'm sure that was taken into account when making this decision.

www.cps.gov.uk/cps/news/sally-lane-and-john-letts-sentenced-sending-money-daesh-supporting-son

chomalungma And if it's a death sentence?

inews.co.uk/news/long-reads/death-row-penalty-sentence-brits-around-the-world-uk-beatles-isis/

chomalungma And if it's a death sentence

It's a death sentence. So what.

Being British shouldn't give you any special rights if you commit a crime abroad.

Unless there is evidence of corruption, dodgy evidence etc.

joyfullittlehippo That's my point though. Iran says she did so the UK has just shrugged it's shoulders and forgotten her. I know she's innocent and being held in horrendous conditions. Boris Johnson acually got her sentence increased with his idiotic bumbling.

Jack Letts has confessed to his crimes and there's a section of our society bleating on about his human rights and bringing him 'home'.

A cynic might think that it's because Jack is a white, middle class son of an organic farmer and Nazanin...isn't.

That's my point though. Iran says she did so the UK has just shrugged it's shoulders and forgotten her

If someone commits a crime abroad, they should serve the sentence abroad and then should be returned to their home country afterwards.

If there are issues over the evidence and the charge, then a country should use its diplomatic clout to raise the issues and raise awareness.

Not sure what relevance this has to the OP.

Jack Letts has confessed to his crimes and there's a section of our society bleating on about his human rights and bringing him 'home

He should stand trial in the country where he committed the crimes. Then brought home after the sentence.

However, I think the authorities who have him want to return terrorists to their home country instead of prosecuting him there.

I don't think many people would have an issue if the authorities who have him sentenced him in the country where he is now or returning him to the actual place he carried out his crimes.

What should be done with UK born fighters who travel abroad to fight for a terrorist organisation?

You can’t compare someone like Radcliffe to someone who knowingly commits a crime abroad though.

In her case of course the government should intervene to bring her home. However actual crime is different, even when the punishment is the death sentence.

It’s quite simple really. Don’t want to be put to death in a foreign country? Then don’t commit a crime there which carries the death sentence.

The government can’t and shouldn’t intervene in other countries even if they have questionable human rights. After all would we want it the other way around? Someone commits murder here and is sentenced here and their government intervenes because they would like that individual to be brought home so they can be put to death instead?

Jack Letts has confessed to his crimes and there's a section of our society bleating on about his human rights and bringing him 'home'.

A cynic might think that it's because Jack is a white, middle class son of an organic farmer and Nazanin...isn't.

I don’t think so, Shamima had the same bleating treatment, re: the ‘bring her home, poor groomed girl and her human rights’

I love how the ‘she was a poor innocent girl who was groomed’ narrative is still going about, even though she actively sought them out, but hey ho.
We also heard a lot about how Shamima’s citizenship was revoked, but everyone knew that Jacks wouldn’t be. Until it was.

@joyfullittlehippo
“And still no one has suggested how this “send them back where they came from” policy is supposed to work with white nationalists, or why Canada is supposed to clean up Britain’s messes. hmm”

First- there is no “send them back” policy at all. The international practice is that no matter your nationality, you stand trial for your crimes in the country in which you committed those crimes. So, the ISIS terrorists left the U.K., committed crimes in Syria, Yemen, wherever , were captured there and are currently there. You can’t “send back” someone who is not here. White nationalist domestic terrorists committed their crimes HERE and so must stand trial here.

Second- stripping citizenship is independent from this. Say, we didn’t strip their citizenship, then all that does is allow us to put diplomatic pressure on Syria (wherever they are imprisoned) to not apply the death penalty, and too, if we want to, accept deportation of them to serve time in our prisons after SYRIA sentences them.

No matter what happens with citizenship, these terrorists will stand trial in the country where they committed their crimes. Citizenship only denotes how much say we have in their judicial decisions and in if they want to deport them.

Obviously, a domestic terrorist is kept here because that’s how international law works. You can’t kill an MP in Britain and be sent to Syria to stand trial there.

In the case of Nazanin, there is an added complexity. She is dual Iran and U.K.

She is imprisoned in Iran, a country she is a citizen of.
The way dual nationality works is that if you are convicted of a crime by one of your countries, the other country you are a citizen of is prohibited by international law from interfering. They cannot protect you. So the U.K. does not have the rights or authority to do anything about her case like they did with the woman that was imprisoned in Egypt for drug smuggling.

Jack Letts is not a citizen of Syria, he is a foreign national to them so they have fewer rights over him. We have more influence (well none now because we stripped his citizenship).

See here...it warns you of this that you cannot get diplomatic help. That is why Nazanin is stuck in Iran. Not because the British Gov don’t care or racism but because she is an Iranian citizen.

“As a dual national you cannot get diplomatic help from the British government when you are in the other country where you hold citizenship.

For example, if you hold both British and Chinese citizenship you cannot get diplomatic help from the UK when you’re in China.”
www.gov.uk/dual-citizenship

@joyfullittlehippo.
Oh....sorry. I am a very literal person. So when I read “policy” I thought you meant “policy”. Thank you for clarifying that for me. :)

It’s not quite as simple as don’t commit crime in a foreign country though, is it? There are countries where women are stoned for the crime of being raped. There are countries where defamation of the ruling family can result in the death penalty. There are countries which sell alcohol and actively encourage drinking but where you can end up imprisoned for drinking.
People have aright to citizenship. International law forbids leaving people stateless.
Nazanin’s situation is truly appalling. AngelasAshes she is a British citizen and whilst she cannot claim diplomatic support automatically, her situation is not ordinary and was worsened by a daft Home Secretary making the situation worse. She deserves full British diplomatic support. She has committed no crimes.