Statement from the Secretary of State for Justice Watch

DayneD89
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#1
Report Thread starter 2 years ago
#1
What is this?/I'm confused
Hi there. If you're confused as to what is going on here then you are probably new to this section of TSR. This is a Model House of Commons, a forum where we emulate the structure of the Real Life House of Commons as an excuse to debate politics.

If you are seeing this and you want to get involved in the debate, please feel free. You do not need to join a party, get approval or join any group to get stuck in right away. If you enjoy it and you do want to join a party then you can do so here. If you have any questions or need any help please message me. I am the current speaker of the house and part of my role involves offering impartial advice to new members so I will always be happy to answer what questions you have. Alternatively, you can read the new members guide to get advice on a wide range of issues.

Note: Please refrain from making comments about how we spend our free time. It is our free time to spend.


Statement from the Secretary of State for Justice



Attachment 724064
Statement from the
Secretary of State of Justice


Mr Speaker,

As many of the House will know, two British Jihadists known as Alexanda Kotey and El Shafee Elsheikh, who were identified as the last two members of the execution cell known as "the Beatles", were captured in Syria by Syrian Kurdish fighters part of the Syrian Democratic Forces and were later made available to the United States Military for interrogation.

These men are traitors to the United Kingdom and must be brought to justice in the English courts. I have, to this effect, recommended that the Crown Prosecution Service try these criminals for high treason against the United Kingdom. This is also a matter of sovereignty, we cannot allow a foreign court to try British citizens for treason and any crime less than treason is not only injustice but an insult to the victims of their vile acts. We must not let crimes like this go unpunished. These two men may be of British origin but they've betrayed this country, their families and themselves. It is imperative that the United States delivers these criminals directly to us and to this end the Foreign Office will be requesting the extradition of these criminals back to the United Kingdom for trial.

May justice be done upon the traitors and all those who would dare deem themselves part of the Islamic State.
0
reply
Joep95
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#2
Report 2 years ago
#2
They should be sent to face charges in front of the international criminal courts and have their citizenship removed.
0
reply
username1524603
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#3
Report 2 years ago
#3
A statement that is not consistent with the legal system in TSR after the TSR Labour Party's reforms last year.
0
reply
Jammy Duel
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#4
Report 2 years ago
#4
Interesting, and if the Americans don't give them to us because they're going before an international court instead?
0
reply
username2718212
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#5
Report 2 years ago
#5
(Original post by Jammy Duel)
Interesting, and if the Americans don't give them to us because they're going before an international court instead?
If the Americans refuse, then yes, they must face an international criminal court to face punishment for their heinous acts.
0
reply
Jammy Duel
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#6
Report 2 years ago
#6
(Original post by Vitiate)
If the Americans refuse, then yes, they must face an international criminal court to face punishment for their heinous acts.
Sooooo, they're going before the international courts, as they should be.
0
reply
TheDefiniteArticle
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#7
Report 2 years ago
#7
Nay. I see no reason to try them for treason when it's an outdated offence and the offences under the Terrorism Act are far more appropriate. Does the Justice Secretary want a conviction? He won't get a conviction for treason.
1
reply
LibertarianMP
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#8
Report 2 years ago
#8
Nay- let the locals deal with them, without all the bureaucratic red tape that holds back what is true justice.
0
reply
Joep95
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#9
Report 2 years ago
#9
Vitiate CoffeeGeek do you/your party/your government research these things?

They aren’t British citizens anymore they lost citizenship in 2014 so it isn’t a sovereignty issue like you claim.
0
reply
Jammy Duel
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#10
Report 2 years ago
#10
(Original post by joecphillips)
Vitiate CoffeeGeek do you/your party/your government research these things?

They aren’t British citizens anymore they lost citizenship in 2014 so it isn’t a sovereignty issue like you claim.
Why do you ask questions you already know the answer to?
0
reply
CountBrandenburg
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#11
Report 2 years ago
#11
Indeed, as Joe mentioned, the two in question no longer have British citizenship, so it stands to reason that their trial and punishment must be made by an international court.
0
reply
Thrillanthropist
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#12
Report 2 years ago
#12
Nay – as has been established, they should be dealt with in an international court. And besides, "high treason"?? What century are you living in? They won't be convicted for treason, that's for sure, as they're no longer British, so although they "adhered to the sovereign's enemy", [I'm assuming that's the part of the treason act you're looking at] as they aren't British citizens I think they didn't have an obligation not to.

Anyway, let international court deal with them.
0
reply
Rakas21
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#13
Report 2 years ago
#13
(Original post by joecphillips)
They should be sent to face charges in front of the international criminal courts and have their citizenship removed.
They were British citizens, to be tried in any other state is offensive.

(Original post by Jammy Duel)
Interesting, and if the Americans don't give them to us because they're going before an international court instead?
Canon amendment, royal prerogative.
0
reply
Joep95
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#14
Report 2 years ago
#14
(Original post by Rakas21)
They were British citizens, to be tried in any other state is offensive.



Canon amendment, royal prerogative.
That’s not what they statement says
0
reply
Jammy Duel
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#15
Report 2 years ago
#15
(Original post by Rakas21)
They were British citizens, to be tried in any other state is offensive.



Canon amendment, royal prerogative.
Canon amendment does not mean that we can dictate what the rest of the world does, try again.
0
reply
TheDefiniteArticle
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#16
Report 2 years ago
#16
(Original post by Jammy Duel)
Canon amendment does not mean that we can dictate what the rest of the world does, try again.
This.

People radically over estimate the effect of canon. All it really does is permit us to act as delegated legislatures (see Irish abortion Bill last term); the point about other bodies is merely incorporating sovereignty as exists IRL.

Posted from TSR Mobile
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Back
to top
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

Do you get study leave?

Yes- I like it (363)
59.31%
Yes- I don't like it (33)
5.39%
No- I want it (172)
28.1%
No- I don't want it (44)
7.19%

Watched Threads

View All
Latest
My Feed