Authored by Patricia Devlin via The Epoch Times,
Shamima Begum failed in a last-ditch legal bid to have her British citizenship restored.
On Wednesday, the Special Immigration Appeals Commission (SIAC) fully dismissed the 23-year-old’s legal challenge against a Home Office decision to revoke her status as a UK citizen.
It means Begum—who travelled from her London home to join the ISIS terrorist group in Syria when she was 15—will not be able to return to the UK.
The ruling followed a five-day hearing in November, where Begum’s lawyers argued she’d been the victim of trafficking for sexual exploitation in that she had fallen for ISIS propaganda and agreed to become a jihadi bride.
However, in his ruling on Wednesday, Mr. Justice Jay said that while there was a “credible suspicion” that Begum was trafficked to Syria for “sexual exploitation,” this was not enough for the appeal to succeed.
“The commission has fully recognised the considerable force in the submissions advanced on behalf of Ms. Begum that the Secretary of State’s conclusion, on expert advice, that Ms. Begum travelled voluntarily to Syria is as stark as it is unsympathetic,” he said.
“Further, there is some merit in the argument that those advising the Secretary of State see this as a black and white issue, when many would say that there are shades of grey.”
He continued: “If asked to evaluate all the circumstances of Ms. Begum’s case, reasonable people with knowledge of all the relevant evidence will differ, in particular in relation to the issue of the extent to which her travel to Syria was voluntary and the weight to be given to that factor in the context of all others.
“Likewise, reasonable people will differ as to the threat she posed in February 2019 to the national security of the United Kingdom, and as to how that threat should be balanced against all countervailing considerations.
“However, under our constitutional settlement these sensitive issues are for the Secretary of State to evaluate and not for the commission.”
Breaches of State Duty
The Special Immigration Appeals Commission concluded there was a “credible suspicion” that Begum was trafficked to Syria for “sexual exploitation” and that there were “arguable breaches of duty” by state bodies in allowing her to travel to the country.
But Justice Jay said in a summary of the commission’s decision that the existence of this suspicion was “insufficient” for her to succeed in her arguments that the deprivation of her British citizenship failed to respect her human rights, adding that given she was now in Syria, the Home Secretary was neither compelled to facilitate her return nor prevented from using “deprivation powers.”
The judge said: “The commission concluded that there was a credible suspicion that Ms. Begum had been trafficked to Syria within the meaning of relevant international legal instruments.
“Essentially, and from the perspective of those responsible for the trafficking, the motive for bringing her to Syria was sexual exploitation to which, as a child, she could not give a valid consent.
“The commission also concluded that there were arguable breaches of duty on the part of various state bodies in permitting Ms. Begum to leave the country as she did and eventually cross the border from Turkey into Syria.”
He added: “In outline, given that Ms. Begum is now in Syria, the state’s corollary investigative duty did not compel the Secretary of State to facilitate her return to the United Kingdom, nor did it prevent him from exercising his deprivation powers.”
In conclusion, the judge said: “In short, the commission decided that a finding that Ms. Begum has been trafficked does not operate as a form of limitation on the Secretary of State’s wide powers.”
No Protection for Trafficked Children
In a statement to The Epoch Times via email on Wednesday, the Home Office welcomed the court ruling.
“We are pleased that the court has found in favour of the Government’s position in this case,” a spokesperson said. “The Government’s priority remains maintaining the safety and security of the UK and we will robustly defend any decision made in doing so.”
Sajid Javid, who was Home Secretary when Begum was first stripped of her British citizenship, also praised the ruling. “I welcome today’s court ruling, which has again upheld my decision to remove an individual’s citizenship on national security grounds,” he said.
“This is a complex case but home secretaries should have the power to prevent anyone entering our country who is assessed to pose a threat to it.”
Begum’s lawyers said Wednesday that the ruling has left “no protection for a British child trafficked out of the UK.”
In a statement released to PA Media, Jean Gareth Peirce and Daniel Furner, from Birnberg Peirce Solicitors, said: “We, the lawyers entrusted with the representation of Ms. Begum in circumstances of extreme difficulty, register our profound disagreement with the decision taken by the home secretary in 2019 and the diminution by the Supreme Court of the ability of the Special Immigration Appeals Commission to consider her legal challenges.
“The outcome is that there is now no protection for a British child trafficked out of the UK if the home secretary invokes national security. Regrettably, this is a lost opportunity to put into reverse a profound mistake and a continuing injustice.
“Ms. Begum remains in unlawful, arbitrary and indefinite detention without trial in a Syrian camp. Every possible avenue to challenge this decision will be urgently pursued.”
The lawyers added: “In our view, that demands the Secretary of State must carefully review the original decision in light of the commission’s troubling findings.”
Amnesty International also voiced its disappointment at the tribunal decision.
Steve Valdez-Symonds, the human rights organisation’s UK refugee and migrant rights director, said: “Along with thousands of others, including large numbers of women and children, this young British woman is now trapped in a dangerous refugee camp in a war-torn country and left largely at the mercy of gangs and armed groups.
“Just as other nations have done, the UK should be helping any of its citizens stranded in Syria—including by assisting in their safe return to the UK, whether or not that means facing possible criminal investigation or prosecution.”
This is a still taken from CCTV footage and issued by the Metropolitan Police in London on Feb. 23, 2015 of 15-year-old Amira Abase, left, Kadiza Sultana, 16, centre, and Shamima Begum, 15, as they pass through Gatwick airport, London, before taking a flight to Turkey on Feb 17, 2015. (AP Photo/Metropolitan Police)
Sexual Exploitation
Begum was 15 when she travelled from Bethnal Green, east London, through Turkey and into ISIS-controlled territory in Syria.
There, she married an ISIS fighter—Dutch-born Yago Riedijk—and lived in Raqqa. She remained in Raqqa for four years until she was discovered in a Syrian refugee camp in 2019. Her British citizenship was revoked shortly after she was found.
Begum was nine months pregnant at the time. The three children she had given birth to since leaving the UK have all passed away. She is currently living at Roj camp in northern Syria, which is run by a militia group known as the Syrian Democratic Forces.
In November 2020, the UK Supreme Court ruled she could not return to Britain to appeal against the decision to revoke her citizenship.
At the SIAC hearing last year, Begum’s barristers Samantha Knights KC and Dan Squires KC said she was “recruited, transported, transferred, harboured and received in Syria for the purposes of ‘sexual exploitation’ and ‘marriage’ to an adult male.”
They also argued that the Home Office unlawfully failed to consider that she travelled to Syria and remained there “as a victim of child trafficking.”
However, Sir James Eadie KC, for the department, said the security services “continue to assess that Ms. Begum poses a risk to national security.”
Eadie later said that then-home secretary Sajid Javid took into account Begum’s age, how she travelled to Syria—including likely online radicalisation—and her activity in the country when deciding to remove her British citizenship.
Loading…
