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.

I
Can't even begin to compare nazanins situation with jack letts.

She is accused of political crimes. Ie - subject to thought police not the same as terrorist atrocities surely?

It’s not quite as simple as don’t commit crime in a foreign country though, is it

British citizen's have to obey the laws of a country they go to - even if the laws are archaic and awful. A British citizen commiting a crime in a foreign country should get the same consequences as a local - just as a foreigner committing a crime in the UK should be treated the same as a British citizen.

eople have aright to citizenship. International law forbids leaving people stateless

True - if a British citizen commits a crime abroad, then the British consulate and Foreign Office should provide some assistance - but can't get you out of jail. They should play a role if there is evidence that the charge is dubious.

If a British citizen commits a crime and is then released from jail and deported, they should be returned to the country they are citizens of. We should take responsibility for our citizens once they have served the time for their crime in a country,

Just as we expect other countries to take responsibility for criminals who are their citizens.

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.

Untrue. The reason the UK stripped Letts of his citizenship is because the Kurds, who are holding him, put pressure on to take him back. They have done so will all Western governments whose citizens they are holding.

I wonder how they choose who to strip nationality from? Quite a few have already returned to the UK from their stints with daesh and I find that quite worrying. And what about children born out there?

I think if somebody was guilty of a crime taking their citizenship away isn't the right way to go. I think they need to be brought back, questioned (because they may have relevant information) & IF there is evidence of a crime then they should go through legal process. If however it is found that they were manipulated or have mental illness made them more likely to be, or they require treatment than they should be given it. We are a democratic country, they were born here & they should be subject to our laws.

@CherryPavlova
“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.”

Yes, Nazanin does deserve British diplomatic support. Unfortunately, international law prohibits the British government from providing her diplomatic support because she is an Iranian citizen in Iran. I don’t make the laws, I am just saying these are the existing laws that the British Government is limited by. Her situation is more ordinary than you think. It is one of the hazards of being a dual citizen.

@winterlife
Yes, the Kurds want to deport Letts. We do that with foreign criminals here. It’s part and parcel of being tried for your crimes. In some cases, the host government determines that deportation to your country of citizenship is the desirable course of action. The fact that this can happen does not make it “untrue” that criminals are tried in the country where they did the crime.

Letts was not tried by the Kurds. He's just been jailed after being captured fleeing Raqqa.

@Winterlife
Guaranteed he has been in front of a military tribunal of sorts because that is how enemy combatants are tried. They aren’t given a trial in a court with a judge and so on.

You don't know that as a fact. From everything I've read, the Kurds have just held individuals as enemy combatants, with no further action. They have asked all Western governments to take back their citizens.

If people have two passports we are allowed lawfully to strip them of the British one and often that is the best course of action for ISIS terrorists, rapists who rape in the UK etc. Most of us in the UK only have one passport so don't have the luxury of choice.

The only US lady in the camps with other ISIS brides was a child of a Yemei diplomat stationed in the US so does not have US citizenship. In the UK Begum has rights to a Bangladeshi passport as her father lives there and she is under 21. I have no problems with our stripping off the UK passports from these people with 2 passports. They rejected our country (or in the case of the Uk Somali rapist chose to reject British values) and have another country and passport.

However the poor Kurds have so many of these people out there - perhaps we should help fund a court for the ISIS women to take place near the camps and speed up their trials. Also those with children under 7 with relatives abroad perhaps could be given the choice to send the children home to be brought up by any non radicalised relatives.

I think citizenship is a fundamental human right that shouldn't be messed with, no matter what the crime. If the crime is that bad, bring them here and lock them up, then we know and control exactly what they're doing.

I think stripping a primary citizenship is landing the secondary country with the problem. I wouldn't be impressed if I were Canada, either.

With rights comes responsibilities. People who have brined their passports, declared that they are enemies of the state and their undying devotion to an ideology which is at odds with the one they are leaving. We couldn’t ‘make’ them be loyal and not to want the destruction of this country then, why should their defeat change this? People in the camps (not all I realise) wounds want to ‘come home to mum and Mac Donald’s) if they didn’t have any other options.

Rights and responsibilities. Yes absolutely. I used to say exactly the same ProfFekko. But now I think human rights are fundamental enough to be universal.

Somebody somewhere decided that human rights didn't matter so much if you see guilty of being Jewish or Gay.

Somebody else decided thay didn't matter if you thought they were withholding information you thought was important enough.

Somebody else thought it didn't matter if they were suspected of terrorism, and that their right mattered so little they could be held in torturous conditions without trial for years.

...or if you were a minor whose parents were of an ethnicity that you suspected
might be working in the country illegally.

Or if it was politically advantageous to chuck out a group with no comeback.

...or if they don't have access to money or legal help to hold you accountable.

Human rights are universal, no exceptions.