Key Highlights:
- Shamima Begum, now 23, was one of three girls who ran away from London in February 2015 to wed IS militants in Syria.
- Begum lost her British citizenship shortly after she emerged in a Syrian refugee camp in 2019.
- The UK tribunal decided in 2019 that it was legal to strip Begum of her citizenship because she had Bangladeshi citizenship by her parents.
- In 2020, the Court of Appeal decided that she should be allowed to return to the UK for her appeal but in 2021, the Supreme Court overturned this decision.
The British government’s decision to strip Shamima Begum of her UK citizenship after she joined the Islamic State group in Syria as a teenager was upheld by judges on Friday,23 February. They said it was not their role to decide if the decision was “harsh” or not.
According to the Press Association (PA) Media, Lady Chief Justice Baroness Carr, who delivered the verdict on the legality of the government decision, said: “The decision in Ms Begum’s case could be seen as harsh. But it could also be seen as Ms Begum’s own fault.”
You can also read: US Raises Concern over Myanmar Civil War, Warns Bangladesh and India
The legal fight for Begum may not be over yet, despite the verdict on Friday, 23 February 2024. According to Alexander dos Santos, a lawyer who specializes in extradition cases, her attorneys could still have ‘some chance’ of challenging the decision again.
A Victim or a Threat?
Shamima Begum, now 23, was one of three girls who ran away from London in February 2015 to wed IS militants in Syria, when the group’s online propaganda attracted many vulnerable young people to its self-declared caliphate. Begum’s husband was a Dutch IS fighter and she had three children, who all perished.
Begum lost her British citizenship shortly after she emerged in a Syrian refugee camp in 2019. She, now lives at the al-Roj camp, located in the northeast of Syria, along with more than 2,000 other people.
Last year, she failed to overturn the decision at the Special Immigration Appeals Commission, a court that deals with cases involving the removal of British citizenship for national security reasons. She tried to challenge the decision again at the Court of Appeal, but the Home Office of Britain resisted the attempt.
A British judge stated in 2019 that not everyone has an unconditional right to British citizenship. The Secretary of State can revoke it unless that would make the person stateless and the UK tribunal decided in 2019 that it was legal to strip Begum of her citizenship because she had Bangladeshi citizenship by her parents.
Bangladesh rejected this claim and refused to admit her into the country. The UK’s Home Secretary at the time, Sajid Javid, pledged to stop anyone who joined ISIS from coming back and declared Begum a national security threat.
The Secretary of State’s Private Office sent a letter to her family in 2019, saying: “You are a British/Bangladeshi dual national who, it is assessed, has traveled to Syria and joined ISIL before. It is assessed that your return to the UK would endanger the national security of the United Kingdom.”
Begum has never been a Bangladeshi citizen and has never been to Bangladesh – and the authorities in the South Asian country have said they will not grant her citizenship.
Other Side of the Story
The revocation of Begum’s British citizenship was challenged by her in court. In 2020, the Court of Appeal decided that she should be allowed to return to the UK for her appeal. But in 2021, the Supreme Court overturned this decision and said that she could only appeal from abroad, citing ‘security concerns’.
Begum’s legal team accused the Home Office, Britain’s internal affairs ministry, of neglecting to investigate whether she was a ‘child victim of trafficking’. However, the judge ruled against this assertion in February 2023, deeming it insufficient grounds for her appeal to be successful.
Her lawyers also claimed that a Canadian agent working for ISIS helped Begum and her friends to enter Syria. A book published in August last year revealed that the UK, Canada, and other allies had hidden the Canadian agent’s involvement in Begum’s case. The UK and Canada did not respond to the allegations, as they usually do for security matters involving intelligence agencies.
What Lies Ahead?
Shamima Begum’s legal representative, Daniel Furner, asserted to the press that they are poised to challenge the ruling. Furner emphasized outside the Royal Courts of Justice, “Our commitment to this cause is resolute; we will continue to pursue every avenue available to us.”
If Begum opts to contest the decision, she will have to pursue the matter through the Court of Appeal in London, as outlined in tribunal legislation. Additionally, her legal counsel has indicated the potential for recourse to the European Court of Human Rights.
Shamima Begum’s case has triggered a heated discussion over the duties and privileges of British nationals who join foreign terrorist organizations. The UK government has maintained that stripping her of citizenship is a vital step to safeguard national security and discourage others from emulating her actions.
However, Begum and her allies have asserted that she is a target of manipulation, trafficking, and human rights abuses and that she should be given a fair opportunity to contest the decision in the UK. The legal dispute is expected to persist, as Begum attempts to overturn the Supreme Court’s verdict that confirmed her banishment from the country.
