British IS schoolgirl 'wants to return home'

[Spymaster]

If it's proof we're after, looks like a court case would be the way forward...but weren't some against that?

I’m not sure. Personally I’m all in favour of her facing a trial. It should be held in the country where the crimes of the organisation she joined have been committed. Syria or Iraq.

 

[Athos]

If it's proof we're after, looks like a court case would be the way forward...but weren't some against that?

Yes, she should be tried locally, where she would have the chance to run these defences/arguments in mitigation. Having her rot without any due process can't be right.

Though it does raise the question of what would happen in the (admittedly unlikely) event she's acquitted, given she's not entitled to enter the UK*, and Bangladesh don't want her. I guess they'd have to look for a third country that's willing to have her.

*unless and until her appeal succeeds.

 

[brogdale]

Yes, she should be tried locally, where she would have the chance to run these defences/arguments in mitigation. Having her rot without any due process can't be right.

Though it does raise the question of what would happen in the (admittedly unlikely) event she's acquitted, given she's not entitled to enter the UK*, and Bangladesh don't want her. I guess they'd have to look for a third country that's willing to have her.

*unless and until her appeal succeeds.

Have to admit that I've not really followed the story very carefully of late, but if the local authorities had wanted to try her (& others in a similar position) wouldn't they have arrested her by now?

 

[Spymaster]

Yes, she should be tried locally, where she would have the chance to run these defences/arguments in mitigation. Having her rot without any due process can't be right.

Though it does raise the question of what would happen in the (admittedly unlikely) event she's acquitted, given she's not entitled to enter the UK*, and Bangladesh don't want her. I guess they'd have to look for a third country that's willing to have her.

*unless and until her appeal succeeds.

If she was acquitted she’d have pretty solid grounds to have her citizenship restored.

 

[Spymaster]

Have to admit that I've not really followed the story very carefully of late, but if the local authorities had wanted to try her (& others in a similar position) wouldn't they have arrested her by now?

Iraq have offered to try the detainees. France has let them, with their citizens. IIRC, the reason Begum hasn’t been handed over to them is because the UKG hasn’t given permission for it’s citizens to be handed over to Iraq. Plus of course, she is no longer a British citizen so they can’t very well give it.

 

[brogdale]

Iraq have offered to try the detainees. France has let them, with their citizens. IIRC, the reason Begum hasn’t been handed over to them is because the UKG hasn’t given permission for it’s citizens to be handed over to Iraq. Plus of course, she is no longer a British citizen so they can’t very well give it.

Interesting; makes the decision to strip citizenship look somewhat unhelpful, then?

 

[Spymaster]

Interesting; makes the decision to strip citizenship look somewhat unhelpful, then?

I don’t know, that’s my speculation. Pretty much every country who has dual nationals in the camps have been stripping their citizenships. I think the Dutch and Canadians are the most prolific. No idea what’s happening with them.

 

[Athos]

Have to admit that I've not really followed the story very carefully of late, but if the local authorities had wanted to try her (& others in a similar position) wouldn't they have arrested her by now?

I'm not sure they want to. I think they'd rather just offload her to someone else.

 

[Athos]

If she was acquitted she’d have pretty solid grounds to have her citizenship restored.

Depends on what evidence was adduced by the prosecution versus what intel is known to the Home Sec, I suppose.

 

[Athos]

In any event, despite her previously arguing that her appeal couldn't proceed without her being allowed back into the UK, she now says it can (as predicted), and the court has agreed.

The court will decide on all of her remaining grounds of appeal (including an amended ground in respect of alleged trafficking) in November.

Edited because, as I'm reading the different judgements, Begum and the court have flip-flopped back and forth about what they seek/will allow. The above seems to be the current position.

 

[Spymaster]

Ok, so I bought the book in which the supposed allegations are made this morning and, wholly unsurprisingly, it says nothing whatsoever that suggests complicity on the behalf of governments. It’s quite critical of the Canadian secret service (CSIS) for not sharing intel with the British quickly enough but doesn’t even get close to suggesting British involvement. It even states that there was absolutely nothing the Canadians could have done to stop the girls from travelling.

The Twitter posts are nonsense from people who either haven’t read the book, or are deliberately misrepresenting it.

 

[danny la rouge]

Twitter posts are nonsense

Hold the phone!

 

[Spymaster]

Hold the phone!

You say that, but with the gusto they’re often quoted with on here you’d think Twitter was the ultimate organ of truth and reason!

 

[cesare]

You say that, but with the gusto they’re often quoted with on here you’d think Twitter was the ultimate organ of truth and reason!

There are some threads that just resemble a Twitter harvest with no accompanying insight or opinion.

 

[danny la rouge]

You say that, but with the gusto they’re often quoted with on here you’d think Twitter was the ultimate organ of truth and reason!

I mean, I can’t speak for others, but yes, the fact that something has been tweeted in itself means only that it has been tweeted.

 

[rubbershoes]

There are some threads that just resemble a Twitter harvest with no accompanying insight or opinion.

Just like many newspaper "articles"

 

[cesare]

Just like many newspaper "articles"

But at least with articles, it's usually clear who's written them and in what context e.g the publication. Twitter is an anonymised level on top of that.

 

[Spymaster]

This is Tasnime Akunji (Begum’s lawyer) on the information in the book:

“However [Britain has] been co-operating with a western ally, trading sensitive intelligence with them whilst they have effectively been nabbing British children and trafficking them across the Syrian border for delivery to Isis all in the name of intelligence-gathering.”

The Canadians have “effectively been nabbing British children and trafficking them…”

This is her lawyer engaging in hysterical hyperbole and outright bullshit. What a fucking idiot.

If that’s skill level of her legal representative it really doesn’t bode well for the likely quality of her appeal, does it?

 

[SpookyFrank]

Have to admit that I've not really followed the story very carefully of late, but if the local authorities had wanted to try her (& others in a similar position) wouldn't they have arrested her by now?

IIRC the Kurdish authorities have stated that they don't have the capacity to try everyone and would prefer that European nationals be repatriated.

 

[SpookyFrank]

If she was acquitted she’d have pretty solid grounds to have her citizenship restored.

If removal of citizenship is a punishment why was it done before any trial took place?

 

[Spymaster]

If removal of citizenship is a punishment why was it done before any trial took place?

Was it a punishment? It was done on the grounds of national security in the wake of her giving an interview that was supportive of IS and the Manchester Arena bombing.

If you give an interview saying blowing up kids pop concerts is justified, don’t be surprised when the government hits you with everything at their disposal.

 

[SpookyFrank]

Was it a punishment? It was done on the grounds of national security in the wake of her giving an interview that was supportive of IS and the Manchester Arena bombing.

If you give an interview saying blowing up kids pop concerts is justified, don’t be surprised when the government hits you with everything at their disposal.

Rendering someone stateless is not at their disposal. It contravenes international law.

 

[Spymaster]

Rendering someone stateless is not at their disposal. It contravenes international law.

Good job they didn’t do that then.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

Good job they didn’t do that then.

Yes they did. And they did it in a way that seemed designed to create ammunition for radicalisers.

See how they treat us? You'll never be accepted here.

 

[Athos]

Rendering someone stateless is not at their disposal. It contravenes international law.

Even if she is de facto stateless (and I accept that there's a reasonable argument that's the case), it's a consequence of the subsequent actions of Bangladesh (which contravene international and Bangladeshi law).

 

[Raheem]

Even if she is de facto stateless (and I accept that there's a reasonable argument that's the case), it's a consequence of the subsequent actions of Bangladesh (which contravene international and Bangladeshi law).

The prior actions, just in point of fact.

 

[Athos]

Yes they did. And they did it in a way that seemed designed to create ammunition for radicalisers.

See how they treat us? You'll never be accepted here.

They didn't make her stateless.

But, yes, it's a shit law insofar as a two-tier citizenship plays into the hands of those who'd seek to drive a wedge.

 

[Athos]

The prior actions, just in point of fact.

No. Bangladesh only disavowed her after her UK citizenship was revoked.

 

[Spymaster]

Yes they did.

No they didn’t. Bangladesh did. This has been explained to you in detail before. Nothing has changed since.

 

[cesare]

Does anyone know if there's a timeline/chronology? (Sorry if there's one posted earlier in the thread)