View previous topic | View next topic

Shamima Begum case

Page 1 of 5
Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next

tetsabb
1313696.  Fri Feb 15, 2019 1:27 pm Reply with quote

Just made me wonder if there is a head teacher in Bethnal Green wondering what to do about the truant who went off to Syria when still of school age and now wants to return.

Oops, have I just opened a small can of worms?

 
Jenny
1313698.  Fri Feb 15, 2019 1:34 pm Reply with quote

I have to say I'm not very sympathetic towards that girl, who made her own bed and apparently now sees the wisdom of lying on one made by the NHS. I'm more sympathetic towards her unborn baby, who didn't ask for any of this.

 
crissdee
1313702.  Fri Feb 15, 2019 1:43 pm Reply with quote

They are talking about this on the news even as I post. I have no sympathy for her whatsoever. She broke the law to join an organisation diametrically opposed to our ideology, now wants to come back and make use of the products of that ideology. I pity the poor child, but she made her bed and should now lie in it.

 
'yorz
1313703.  Fri Feb 15, 2019 1:46 pm Reply with quote

She was only 15 when she left, having being radicalised / brainwashed. She's British isn't she? So she should be able to return. However, plenty of detoxing to do with her, also to prevent her from influencing other girls who may be toying with the idea.

 
AlmondFacialBar
1313704.  Fri Feb 15, 2019 1:50 pm Reply with quote

That's the thing, she was 15 and we all do some really stupid things at that age, but the real problem to me is that she doesn't seem to have changed her ideology since. Bring her home by all means for the sake of her child, but make her face the consequences of her actions and keep her out of circulation until she's no longer a dangerous influence on others. And the babby will probably be best off being adopted...

:-)

AlmondFacialBar

 
PDR
1313735.  Fri Feb 15, 2019 7:46 pm Reply with quote

'yorz wrote:
She was only 15 when she left, having being radicalised / brainwashed.


I have to say that's my view too. It's interesting that people seem far more tolerant towards kids who joined extremist western cults (the moonies, the davidians etc) and who when rescued took months of psychiatric care (aka "deprogramming") before they could even view their experiences objectively than they can be towards kids groomed into moslem extremist cults. I personally feel she should be given the chance to personally experience how liberal cultures can be better to live in than extremist theocracies.

Quote:
She's British isn't she? So she should be able to return.


As I understand it that's the legal position as well. If she has british nationality she must be readmitted to the UK if she arrives at the border. International law prohibits making a person stateless, so the UK can only revoke her nationality after confirming that she has been able to get another nationality. Even the 2014 Immigration Act, which explicitly tried to give the Home Sec the power to revoke citizenships, had to include constraints and caveats to that effect to comply with our international treaty obligations. The relevant bit is:

Immigration Act 2014 wrote:

Deprivation if conduct seriously prejudicial to vital interests of the UK


In section 40 of the British Nationality Act 1981 (deprivation of citizenship), after subsection (4) insert—
“(4A) But that does not prevent the Secretary of State from making an order under subsection (2) to deprive a person of a citizenship status if—

(a) the citizenship status results from the person’s naturalisation,

(b) the Secretary of State is satisfied that the deprivation is conducive to the public good because the person, while having that citizenship status, has conducted him or herself in a manner which is seriously prejudicial to the vital interests of the United Kingdom, any of the Islands, or any British overseas territory, and

(c) the Secretary of State has reasonable grounds for believing that the person is able, under the law of a country or territory outside the United Kingdom, to become a national of such a country or territory.


Quote:
However, plenty of detoxing to do with her, also to prevent her from influencing other girls who may be toying with the idea.


Again, that's my view too. She has a right to return, but she has allegedly committed offences for which even as a 15-year-old she would expect to face criminal proceedings, and she's now older. But I gather there is some evidence of undue influence (grooming) by a radical uncle and/or father (difficult to distinguish fact from hysterical reporting on this, so it could be either, both or neither). If that is the case the court might see her at least partially as a victim, so they might suggest treatment rather than prison.

I think the one thing this case ISN'T is a black/white easy one with simple and obvious conclusions.

YMMV,

PDR

 
tetsabb
1313765.  Sat Feb 16, 2019 5:53 am Reply with quote

A good line, PDR. No easy answers on this one.
I did see an article in the Indy, suggesting that the UK gov should do little or nothing to facilitate her return. If her family want to pay for flights etc, it can be down to them.

I have just checked, and 'Begum' is not a name, but an honorific for any married or widowed woman.

 
suze
1313774.  Sat Feb 16, 2019 6:56 am Reply with quote

It was originally an honorific, certainly, although it seems to have become a surname as well among Pakistani communities in (especially) Britain and the US.

I did hear a claim on the wireless that Ms Begum's current pregnancy is not her first, and that she already has one or possibly two children. The reporter didn't say it in so many words, but there was a hint that her main role in Syria was to open her legs for ISIS-ists who were considered to deserve a "prize".

Whether that's true I cannot say. But if it is, does it move her a bit along the axis towards "victim"?

 
Leith
1313776.  Sat Feb 16, 2019 7:13 am Reply with quote

Another thing strikes me about this and other debates surrounding the repatriation of potential miscreants:

Irrespective of the accused's innocence or guilt and potential for redemption or to pose an ongoing threat, they often seem to talk about whether the subject should be permitted the privilege of re-entering or remaining in the UK as if we are the only country whose opinion matters on the subject; as if identifying the slightest hint of foreignness gives us the right to dump our potential troublemakers on the rest of world like a throwback to the days of transportation (reference Sajid Javid's ill-considered comments on the latest group of Windrush deportees).

Even if we did consider Shamina Begum (without trial) to be an irredeemable genocidal maniac, as a British citizen, why should it be any other country's responsibility to work out how to deal with her*?

* Another country could claim its right to try a foreigner accused of criminality on their soil, of course, but I've not seen any focus on such a situation in this case.

So, sympathy? Maybe, maybe not. Right to return? Absolutely.
Some form of detention, mandatory rehabilitation or trial will likely need to be considered, but the UK has a responsibility to deal with that.

 
Leith
1313780.  Sat Feb 16, 2019 8:41 am Reply with quote

suze wrote:
I did hear a claim on the wireless that Ms Begum's current pregnancy is not her first, and that she already has one or possibly two children. The reporter didn't say it in so many words, but there was a hint that her main role in Syria was to open her legs for ISIS-ists who were considered to deserve a "prize".

Whether that's true I cannot say. But if it is, does it move her a bit along the axis towards "victim"?


Shamina Begum herself says that she was married shortly after her arrival in Syria. In the last few months her husband surrendered to Syrian forces and her first two children died, prompting her flight from the 'caliphate'. The marriage would presumably not be considered consensual under UK law, if she was still a minor at the time. Begum expresses no personal regrets over her life in Syria generally, and expresses concern for her husband's wellbeing. As her UK family point out, though, she remains in a refugee camp surrounded by ISIS supporters, so may not feel entirely free to speak her mind.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/feb/14/london-schoolgirl-who-fled-to-join-isis-wants-to-return-to-uk

 
AlmondFacialBar
1313782.  Sat Feb 16, 2019 8:42 am Reply with quote

I didn't hear about the sex slave bit, but the two older children seem to be well established and are apparently both dead. The impression I got is that they were both fathered by her IS preordained husband, though, so maybe that's where her being the prize for someone comes in? And if it does indeed turn out that she was groomed by an older relation I sincerely hope they're locked away and the key dropped down an unusually smelly sewer.

:-)

AlmondFacialBar

 
PDR
1313790.  Sat Feb 16, 2019 9:16 am Reply with quote

tetsabb wrote:
No easy answers on this one.


I think more than anything that's my summary opinion (only you managed to express it in six words rather than my customary 600).

It is hard to sift the facts from the alternative facts because this subject seems to be producing more bollocks than a eunuch induction centre. But as far as I can judge the most likely reality is:

1. She went voluntarily, but her decision was heavily influenced by her father, her uncle and the clerics in the mosque they attended.

2. Within a month of arrival she was married, apparently willingly (although at her age in this country her consent wouldn't be relevant).

3. Her husband was an Isis soldier of some sort, but he was also a westerner who joined the jihadists. As I understand it he is Dutch, and was an active Isis soldier when they married, but he was then captured or arrested [this isn't clear] by Turkish police(?) and held with torture and interrogation for six months before being released. From this time Isis regarded him as an inactive soldier (retired/disabled) and the couple have lived what they regarded as an ordinary civilian life within the Caliphate since then.

4. There doesn't seem to be any grounds for suggesting that her relationship with him as anything but consensual (with the afore-mentioned caveat about the difference between consent and legal consent), and there certainly doesn't seem to be any actual evidence that she was a sex-slave or that she was awarded as a "prize" to a faithful soldier. That seems to have been made up by the ravening anti-islamists.

5. It seems she has had two children, but both died - her son towards the end of last year aged 8 months from illness compounded by malnutrition, followed a few weeks ago by her daughter aged just under two from "illness" (no further details). She is now pregnant with her third.

PDR

 
tetsabb
1313791.  Sat Feb 16, 2019 9:23 am Reply with quote

I wonder what the reactions wouls be if a young girl had been enchanted by the Lord's Resistance Army in Uganda, and headed off there
?

 
suze
1313810.  Sat Feb 16, 2019 1:32 pm Reply with quote

PDR wrote:
That seems to have been made up by the ravening anti-islamists.


That seems likely. There is enough to dislike about this situation without needing to go down that road that it is perhaps a little unfortunate that a BBC reporter chose to go there. (Or maybe he didn't. That's what he seemed to me to be saying, but the A229 had more of my attention than he did and so it is possible I do him a disservice.)


Coming back to the point of whether Ms Begum should be allowed to return to the UK, Britain is signatory to several UN conventions which, when taken together, mean that it cannot revoke a person's citizenship if that would leave the person stateless.

But when Theresa May was Home Secretary she was responsible for the Immigration Act 2014, which in part repudiates those conventions. She gave herself the right to revoke citizenship even if this would render a person stateless, but the power seems never to have been used. If it has not been used in this instance, then how can Britain stop Ms Begum returning?

Sajid Javid's use of words like "could" and "might" suggests that even he doesn't know the answer to that question, but I imagine his people are working on it.

 
barbados
1313816.  Sat Feb 16, 2019 2:34 pm Reply with quote

What could happen is she is tried in her absence and comvicted to the crime she has admintted, then sentence her to the maximum, which at the moment is 15 years (I think) that will take care of her initially, then allow her appeal where she can be assessed as to her culpanility.

That would keep most people happy surely??

 

Page 1 of 5
Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next

All times are GMT - 5 Hours


Display posts from previous:   

Search Search Forums

Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group