The Student Room Group

IS bride has her UK citizenship REVOKED

Scroll to see replies

Finally the general public have been listened to on an issue which they are worried about.
Be interesting to see the legal basis as that is bound to be challenged. I thought it was illegal to make someone stateless?
I dont want her back as she is a traitor to this country, but not sure how they are going to justify this one when hundreds of actual fighters have made it back to the UK.
Reply 3
Original post by 999tigger
Be interesting to see the legal basis as that is bound to be challenged. I thought it was illegal to make someone stateless?
I dont want her back as she is a traitor to this country, but not sure how they are going to justify this one when hundreds of actual fighters have made it back to the UK.

She has a Bengali passport so she is not really stateless
Reply 4
Interesting precedent.
bravo
Good decision finally, apparently she was born in Bangladesh so she will not be stateless; so it is legal under international law.
Reply 7
lmaoooo
I've been expecting that.
Her recent interview comments and all the media publicity focusing on her guaranteed it would happen sooner rather than later.
Original post by 999tigger
Be interesting to see the legal basis as that is bound to be challenged. I thought it was illegal to make someone stateless?
I dont want her back as she is a traitor to this country, but not sure how they are going to justify this one when hundreds of actual fighters have made it back to the UK.

I suspect the Home Office has lawyers and made the decision under legal advice.

As mentioned before, it is not illegal per se. Naturalised persons can have their citizenship revoked. Seems she has Bangladeshi citizenship or could reasonably acquire it; presumably she is a naturalised UK citizen. Always risky giving insight when we don't know her specific immigration status/background.
(edited 5 years ago)
Original post by The RAR
She has a Bengali passport so she is not really stateless

Never seen it mentioned before. That seems enough.
Original post by Notoriety
I suspect the Home Office has lawyers and made the decision under legal advice.

As mentioned before, it is not illegal per se. Naturalised persons can have their citizenship revoked. Seems she has Bangladeshi citizenship or could reasonably acquire it; presumably she is a naturalised UK citizen. Always risky giving insight when we don't know her specific immigration status/background.


I thought she was born here? Its an easy choice then. Tbf none of the media and experts picked up on this.
(edited 5 years ago)
Original post by 999tigger
I thought she was born here? Its an easy choice then.


Being born in the UK does not automatically ensure citizenship since the 1980s.
Reply 13
Well....Damn
I have nothing to say
Think this has got to be the best decision that the the home office has done. For once they actually they actually listened to the public. Her recent interview proved that she is idiotic and still a threat to the country and the world. When she said she didn’t regret joining ISIS and when she made the comment about the Manchester attack, I think that was when the home office decided to revoke her citizenship (I hope her parents are next as they didn’t help either). Thousands if not millions of people’s lives have been destroyed in Iraq, Syria and the U.K. and around the world because of this group. And she says she doesn’t regret it? She can rot in hell
Original post by 999tigger
Be interesting to see the legal basis as that is bound to be challenged. I thought it was illegal to make someone stateless?
I dont want her back as she is a traitor to this country, but not sure how they are going to justify this one when hundreds of actual fighters have made it back to the UK.

She became public and even more in the last few days. She did an interview in which she commented about not regretting it and trying to justify the Manchester attack. It just shows that she still is a threat to the country.
Original post by londonmyst
Being born in the UK does not automatically ensure citizenship since the 1980s.

Aye, was just gonna just say this.

Not ensure; doesn't trigger automatically. You have to, essentially, be resident here for 5 years (in this lass's case).
(edited 5 years ago)
Original post by Nadia19962
She became public and even more in the last few days. She did an interview in which she commented about not regretting it and trying to justify the Manchester attack. It just shows that she still is a threat to the country.

Yes I know all that, but the thinking was she was a British citizen by birth and thus allowed to return. I dont want her back for the risk, treason, lack of remorse an expense. The interviews with no remorse just confirmed that.
Original post by Notoriety
I suspect the Home Office has lawyers and made the decision under legal advice.

As mentioned before, it is not illegal per se. Naturalised persons can have their citizenship revoked. Seems she has Bangladeshi citizenship or could reasonably acquire it; presumably she is a naturalised UK citizen. Always risky giving insight when we don't know her specific immigration status/background.


You are right that we don’t know the details of her status.

If she is British by birth as opposed to naturalisation, then “could reasonably acquire” another nationality isn’t good enough. She actually has to have another nationality now.

If she is naturalised British (or rather was registered as British on her parents’ naturalisation) “could reasonably acquire” is good enough.

It is hard to be a Bangladeshi dual national. Bangladesh normally requires its citizens to get permission to be a dual national. Without that permission Bangladeshi citizenship may be lost. Goodness knows if there are any exceptions to this.

There is a lot of scope for egg on face here.
begumsmallbrownpepe.jpg

feels bad man

Quick Reply

Latest

Trending

Trending