Shamima Begum was born and raised in Britain, but the government of the UK thinks that the Kurdish-led Autonomous Administration of North and East Syria should take responsibility for her or, failing that, the People’s Republic of Bangladesh. The latter has made clear that she will not be given Bangladeshi citizenship.
The Autonomous Administration of North and East Syria wants Shamima Begum to be repatriated. However, as it is not recognised as a state, it does not have the power to deport her to Britain.
The UK’s position is cynicism of the highest order. The UK is forcing an unrecognised quasi-state to do its bidding, and demonstrating that it does not have faith in its own legal processes.
Citizens of foreign states are sometimes deported from the UK when convicted of criminal offences. I imagine that more than a few of those who oppose the repatriation of Shamima Begum would be outraged if the UK was unable to deport a foreign citizen because the other state had revoked the citizenship of that person. A principle must be applied universally.
Yes, the law under which we live is bourgeois law, but I prefer the rule of bourgeois law to the diktat of a minister of a bourgeois government.
Justice must be done, and be seen to be done.
If Shamima Begum has broken British law (and no-one seems to be able to say which law she broken) she should be charged under British law and tried in a British court.
British citizens are supposedly free from arbitrary arrest and detention, rights that some would claim date back to Magna Carta.
Autocracies across the world detain people on the basis of secret “intelligence” testimony, and the UK is going one step further, permanently exiling one of its own citizens on the basis of secret “intelligence”.
Under British “anti-terrorism” legislation there is not one single offence with one penalty. There are a range of offences, with a range of penalties. Had Shamima Begun not been theoretically entitled to citizenship of another state, the UK would have had to accept her repatriation, and she could have been tried in Britain for any alleged offences, and have received an appropriate sentence, if found guilty.
The statue of justice atop the Old Bailey wears a blindfold, to represent the concept of judging the accused on the basis of the evidence, not on the basis of who they are. Everyone should be equal before the law, and it is clearly a violation of this principle for two citizens of the UK to be treated differently.
The UK government can remove the citizenship of one person, and sentence them to be exiled, without a trial, and yet will repatriate another person who has committed the same offence, and try them in a court of law. Some UK citizens are effectively second-class citizens, because their citizenship can be removed, and they can be denied a fair trial, whereas the citizenship of others cannot be removed, no matter what they have done.
The UK is behaving in a different fashion to other states with respect to this issue. Other states in Europe have accepted responsibility for all their citizens who were involved with ISIS, and repatriated them.
The UK is acting outwith the rule of law in the Shamima Begum case.
www.channel4.com
