Little miss 1st world problems got herself into a real 3rd world problem - UK has no obligation to solve them for her

[raharris1973]

Shamima Begum | The Independent

The latest breaking news, comment and features from The Independent.

www.independent.co.uk

Teenager thought that ISIS was the solution to her first world problems, and she ended up with a very third world problem.

I think UK courts are starting to differ, but the UK is under no moral obligation to take her back.

There may be some interpretations of UK common law (I don't know, not a barrister), maybe even some international legal conventions that do obligate the UK to take her back in a strictly legal sense.

If so, that's a case of governments signing on to rules that overpromised on human rights. They never anticipated that people would seek the unconditional protection of those rights at convenience, while showing no reciprocal concern for the rights of their national community.

She apologized, but it's one of those not good enough apologies that doesn't seem to accept responsibility and still tries to disperse blame.

 

[bintananth]

Dumb teenager does dumb thing, faces consequences. It's a tale as old as time.

Stripping her of UK citizenship and refusing to let her come back is shitty. Instead they should have let her return and punished her for what she did.

 

[LordsFire]

Dumb teenager does dumb thing, faces consequences. It's a tale as old as time.

Stripping her of UK citizenship and refusing to let her come back is shitty. Instead they should have let her return and punished her for what she did.

No.

She literally went and joined the enemy. That's treason.

 

[ShieldWife]

Nope, don’t let her back. She isn’t British. She is a radical Islamist, not a Brit. I doubt she wants to live in Britain because she loves Shakespeare, the Anglican Church, or freedom. She likely wants the wealth, comforts, and safety that a first world nation provides - meanwhile her presence would make Britain less wealthy, comfortable, safe, and first world.

I can’t think of any good reason to let a member of ISIS into the UK much less give them citizenship.

 

[Robovski]

Dumb teenager should pay the consequences of their dumb actions.

 

[Bear Ribs]

On the one hand, I don't have a whole heck of a lot of sympathy for Begun, she made her own bed there and deserves to lie in it.

On the other hand, per British Law, it is illegal for any British Citizen to be stripped of citizenhood and made stateless. The fig leaf that "she could become a Bangladeshi citizen" when Bangladesh has said no, and also that if she ever sets foot in Bangladesh she will be executed, makes that claim extremely thin. I'm quite uncomfortable with a nation deciding it gets to break its own laws and deny due process just because it's feeling pissy at someone.

 

[bintananth]

Nope, don’t let her back. She isn’t British. She is a radical Islamist, not a Brit. I doubt she wants to live in Britain because she loves Shakespeare, the Anglican Church, or freedom. She likely wants the wealth, comforts, and safety that a first world nation provides - meanwhile her presence would make Britain less wealthy, comfortable, safe, and first world.

I can’t think of any good reason to let a member of ISIS into the UK much less give them citizenship.

The UK stripped her of her UK citizenship. That should not have happened.

The US had a case (reached the Supreme Court) where a Japanese-American who was in Japan when Pearl Harbor happend was convicted of treason when he came back to the US because was drafted by the Japanese and fought for them.

His conviction was upheld but he was not stripped of his US citizenship. Something like that is what should have happened to this girl.

 

[ShieldWife]

I do have some sympathy for her. According to the story, she was 15 when she left to join ISIS. Was this decision entirely her own? Who helped her leave the country? What kind of indoctrination was she subjected to growing up? I can’t say that she is fully responsible for the series of events that lead to this, but I think that’s ultimately not what matters, because there are probably billions of people around the world from dysfunctional nations that would love to come to a place like Britain. If they all came, there would be no Britain at all anymore, which is the left’s plan.

 

[ShieldWife]

The UK stripped her of her UK citizenship. That should not have happened.

The US had a case (reached the Supreme Court) where a Japanese-American who was in Japan when Pearl Harbor happend was convicted of treason when he came back to the US because was drafted by the Japanese and fought for them.

His conviction was upheld but he was not stripped of his US citizenship. Something like that is what should have happened to this girl.

I don’t know the details of that case, so I can’t really comment, though it does seem unjust to charge him with treason.

I’m not suggesting that this girl should be charged with treason, I’m just saying that she’s not British regardless of what some sheet of paper might say or used to say, and so she shouldn’t be given citizenship. Both she and the UK (but especially the UK) would be better served by her living in a country that better matched her values.

 

[raharris1973]

I remember being 15, I was capable of moral reasoning. I getting closer to 50 now but still don't feel I was an uncontrolled infant as a teenager. I am childless, so maybe I don't feel the sympathy that somebody's who's had a kid feels.

 

[Lord Sovereign]

Shamima Begum is a traitor and should be hanged if she ever returns here. High Treason against the crown has a price and this uniquely disloyal generation ought to be reminded of that.

 

[Cherico]

Shamima Begum is a traitor and should be hanged if she ever returns here. High Treason against the crown has a price and this uniquely disloyal generation ought to be reminded of that.

Countries are under no obligation to take back traitors.

 

[ATP]

Dumb teenager does dumb thing, faces consequences. It's a tale as old as time.

Stripping her of UK citizenship and refusing to let her come back is shitty. Instead they should have let her return and punished her for what she did.

I am not merciful as you,but punishing her when doing nothing to islamist in England is stupid.If british cleaned their house,i would agree with punishing her.They did not.

 

[Hlaalu Agent]

I think we are missing an important discussion, is she a vegan cat?

 

[KilroywasNOTHere]

hate to admit it, but she should consider to lucky. in our "First world problematic nation" she's likley at worse to face life in prison. Had this been the medieval ages, she'd be hanged and her entire family (edit: scratch that the males) would be sterilized and forced to join a monestary. One action that the mananimal has never tolerated througout it's whole evolution is betraying the tribe.

 

[Despite]

On the one hand, I don't have a whole heck of a lot of sympathy for Begun, she made her own bed there and deserves to lie in it.

On the other hand, per British Law, it is illegal for any British Citizen to be stripped of citizenhood and made stateless. The fig leaf that "she could become a Bangladeshi citizen" when Bangladesh has said no, and also that if she ever sets foot in Bangladesh she will be executed, makes that claim extremely thin. I'm quite uncomfortable with a nation deciding it gets to break its own laws and deny due process just because it's feeling pissy at someone.

It has been legally tested, and so far held up. At the time she was stripped of Citizenship there was a reasonable expectation that she could claim Bangladeshi citizenship.

Bangladesh saying no, and threatening to kill her makes them the problem, not the UK. It is a similar situation to the child grooming criminals who tried to avoid being deported by attempting to renounce Pakistani citizenship, after their British citizenship was revoked.

 

[Abhishekm]

Probabaly wrong but I though the case was she renounced her citizenship to become a member/citizen/subject of the Islamic State? Like yeah paperwork was never filed and there was no official ISIS embassy department handling that stuff atleast in the UK. But the people who left when ISIS was still something like a state did join burning their passports verbally renouncing their old nationalities and accepting membership in the caliphate right?

I mean unless your prepare to honestly pull the cobwebs off the treason and defection laws what choice do you have other than either considering her past rejection of UK citizenship valid or letting her go?

And in the spirit of all things devolveing to Hitler comparisons over time;

If in World War 2 a London teen defected to Berlin, accepted citizenship there and married 3 SS officers in succession. Would the UK be obligated to grant her citizenship back because there wasn't an emigration policy for people joining Nazi Germany at the time she left? Or should they just let her be one of the two Germany's problem.

And I use the UK here because we all know what France did back then and the USSR would have just shot her. Or gulag either or.

 

[Despite]

Probabaly wrong but I though the case was she renounced her citizenship to become a member/citizen/subject of the Islamic State? Like yeah paperwork was never filed and there was no official ISIS embassy department handling that stuff atleast in the UK. But the people who left when ISIS was still something like a state did join burning their passports verbally renouncing their old nationalities and accepting membership in the caliphate right?

I mean unless your prepare to honestly pull the cobwebs off the treason and defection laws what choice do you have other than either considering her past rejection of UK citizenship valid or letting her go?

And in the spirit of all things devolveing to Hitler comparisons over time;

If in World War 2 a London teen defected to Berlin, accepted citizenship there and married 3 SS officers in succession. Would the UK be obligated to grant her citizenship back because there wasn't an emigration policy for people joining Nazi Germany at the time she left? Or should they just let her be one of the two Germany's problem.

And I use the UK here because we all know what France did back then and the USSR would have just shot her. Or gulag either or.

The various human rights conventions, refugee conventions and other treaties and acts which currently restrain Governments mostly appear to post-date WW2. So the answer to your proposal is that the UK would not have been obligated to do much.

 

[Marduk]

On the one hand, I don't have a whole heck of a lot of sympathy for Begun, she made her own bed there and deserves to lie in it.

On the other hand, per British Law, it is illegal for any British Citizen to be stripped of citizenhood and made stateless. The fig leaf that "she could become a Bangladeshi citizen" when Bangladesh has said no, and also that if she ever sets foot in Bangladesh she will be executed, makes that claim extremely thin.

Huh? Why would Bangladesh execute her? That seems like something UK should be interested in too.

This case is so controversial because it points at a dissonance between legalistic quirks of national and international laws, and the elephant in the room in form of the question of what the hell does citizenship even mean in these days.

She should either be stripped of citizenship, or given back her citizenship and then be severely punished for treason, as citizenship implies or at least should imply by common sense, an expectation of at least some degree of loyalty and allegiance, which clearly was broken. She should pursue citizenship in a country she feels she can be loyal to with no regrets or dillemas.
Perhaps she should consider the semi-new and fresh version of Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan.

The other aspect of that is that apparently putting her in a legal quagmire citizenship wise is a way of punishing her and making an example out of her that's more feasible than getting her an actual sedition or treason sentence and then making her actually go through it, due to UK's gutlessness in those regards, so its better than nothing, which is what would likely happen if she is allowed back.

I'm quite uncomfortable with a nation deciding it gets to break its own laws and deny due process just because it's feeling pissy at someone.

Its UK, they have loads of obsolete dead laws on the books, who cares. There is no reason why even stupider modern-ish laws made in the name of "humanitarian" reasons should be immune from joining that list.

Once again, the government lost the chance to repeal a list of legal curiosities

In the customary rush to create exciting new bills, the government once more lost the chance to repeal a list of legal curiosities.

www.theguardian.com

 

[Bear Ribs]

Huh? Why would Bangladesh execute her? That seems like something UK should be interested in too.

Shamima Begum: IS bride ‘would face death penalty in Bangladesh’

Bangladesh's foreign minister says the 19-year-old IS bride has "nothing to do" with his country.

www.bbc.com

Bangladesh doesn't play games, they have a pretty strict policy of hanging in the case of a wide range of crimes and Begum has committed some of them.

Their policy is that if you're ISIS, or ISIS supporter*, you get the rope.

*More broadly any recognized terrorist group, but as nobody can contest that Begum supported ISIS the other groups are moot.

Its UK, they have loads of obsolete dead laws on the books, who cares. There is no reason why even stupider modern-ish laws made in the name of "humanitarian" reasons should be immune from joining that list.

Once again, the government lost the chance to repeal a list of legal curiosities

In the customary rush to create exciting new bills, the government once more lost the chance to repeal a list of legal curiosities.

www.theguardian.com

I care. And this is very certainly not in the same class of laws as Eating Ice Cream on Sunday or a Cab driver failing to ask a passenger if they have Smallpox, citizenship is kind of a big deal. If they don't want those laws they can change them, not decide they're above the law.