"In the latest stage of the former Isis bride’s legal battle against the British government, the Special Immigration Appeals Commission (SIAC) had considered arguments that she was made “de-facto stateless” after being trafficked to Syria.
Story link: Decision to remove Shamima Begum’s British citizenship was lawful, court rules | The Independent
A summary of the judgment said there was “credible suspicion” that Begum had been trafficked to Syria for sexual exploitation as a child, and “arguable breaches of duty” by state bodies who failed to stop her leaving the UK.
But Mr Justice Jay found that those factors were not a bar to her British citizenship being removed, and that issues around whether Begum travelled to Syria voluntarily and poses a threat “are for the Secretary of State to evaluate and not for the Commission”.
“The commission has been unable to conclude that the secretary of state erred in any material respect,” the ruling said."
Hmm.
She was trafficked for sexual exploitation as a child
She was also a child when she “travelled to Syria voluntarily”.
Well then she had underage sex “voluntarily”. But underage sex doesn’t exist “voluntarily” in British law as a child can’t consent.
It should not be hard for the law to see to see that a child in an adult world is vulnerable to more than one influence, given that they have already identified one.
After three pregnancies and three dead children in three years, this (now) woman is of a different view.
The basis of the removal of citizenship is that allegedly Begum can claim citizenship in Bangladesh, as her parents came from there.
But the Bangladesh government warns that she could be executed if she tried to live there.
The government, FGS.
Only well heeled lawyers would have the brass neck to argue that this does not conflict with normal human rights; the same rights that are applied to refugees - let alone citizens, to whom the government owes a duty.
Apologies to asses
