Shamima Begum: Court rules IS bride can return to UK to challenge removal of British citizenship
The 20-year-old left the UK in 2015 and lived under IS rule for more than three years before she was found in a refugee camp.
Thursday 16 July 2020 16:55, UK
Shamima Begum, one of three east London schoolgirls who travelled to Syria to join so-called Islamic State, should be allowed to return to the UK to challenge the removal of her British citizenship, senior judges have ruled.
The 20-year-old left the UK in February 2015 and lived under IS rule for more than three years before she was found, nine months pregnant, in a refugee camp in February last year.
The then home secretary Sajid Javid revoked her British citizenship on national security grounds later that month.
In an interview with Sky News she claimed she was "just a housewife" during her four years in IS' self-declared caliphate, where she married a young Dutch fighter called Yago Riedijk three weeks after arriving.
She said she left Raqqa in January 2017 with her husband but her children, a one-year-old girl and a three-month-old boy, had both since died.
Her third child, called Jarrah, died shortly after he was born last year.
Ms Begum took legal action against the Home Office, claiming the government's decision was unlawful because it rendered her stateless and exposed her to a real risk of death or inhuman and degrading treatment
In February, the Special Immigration Appeals Commission (SIAC) - a specialist tribunal which hears challenges to decisions to remove someone's British citizenship on national security grounds - ruled the decision was lawful as Ms Begum was "a citizen of Bangladesh by descent" at the time of the decision.
The tribunal also found that she "cannot play any meaningful part in her appeal and that, to that extent, the appeal will not be fair and effective", but ruled that "it does not follow that her appeal succeeds".
Ms Begum's challenge to the Home Office's decision to refuse to allow her to enter the UK to effectively pursue her appeal was also rejected.
The Court of Appeal has now ruled that "the only way in which she can have a fair and effective appeal is to be permitted to come into the United Kingdom to pursue her appeal".
Lord Justice Flaux - sitting with Lady Justice King and Lord Justice Singh - said: "Fairness and justice must, on the facts of this case, outweigh the national security concerns, so that the leave to enter appeals should be allowed."
The judge found that "the national security concerns about her could be addressed and managed if she returns to the United Kingdom".
In its ruling, the court said: "If the Security Service and the Director of Public Prosecutions consider that the evidence and public interest tests for a prosecution for terrorist offences are met, she could be arrested and charged upon her arrival in the United Kingdom and remanded in custody pending trial."
Her family's lawyer told Sky News they were "heartened by today's decision but understand there is still a long road ahead" .
Sky's defence and security correspondent Alistair Bunkall said the decision "really bolsters her case, being able to return to the UK, albeit inevitably under very strict controls".
Ms Begum's solicitor Daniel Furner said she was "not afraid of facing British justice" and wanted the chance to "clear her name".
"Justice cannot be defeated, or indefinitely delayed, because a case is difficult or because national security is engaged," he said.
"Fundamental rights are not extinguished because a person is abroad, or because the allegations against them are serious."
Downing Street said it was "bitterly disappointed" by the ruling while the Home Office has vowed to apply for permission to appeal the judgment.
"The government's top priority remains maintaining our national security and keeping the public safe," a spokesperson for the department said.
Mr Javid said he "respects" the court's decision but that "any restrictions of rights and freedoms faced by Ms Begum are a direct consequence of the actions that she has taken, in violation of both government guidance and common morality".
He added in a statement: "It is not clear to me why an appeal could not be made abroad using modern technology...
"Allowing her - and indeed other terrorists - back into the UK to pursue an appeal would create a national security risk that cannot be fully mitigated, even with the diversion of significant resources...
"If Ms Begum does come to this country it will prove impossible to subsequently remove her. I am therefore deeply concerned about this judgment. I welcome the decision of the Home Office to seek to appeal it."
Human rights organisation Liberty, which intervened in Ms Begum's appeal, welcomed the ruling.
Liberty lawyer Katie Lines said: "The right to a fair trial is not something the government can take away on a whim.
"It is a fundamental part of our justice system and equal access to justice must apply to everyone.
"Banishing someone is the act of a government shirking its responsibilities and it is critical that cruel and irresponsible Government decisions can be properly challenged and overturned."