Decision to remove Shamima Begum of British citizenship ‘unlawful’, court hears, as ISIS bride fights to return to UK

25 October 2023, 00:21 | Updated: 25 October 2023, 00:22

The decision to revoke Shamima Begum’s British citizenship was “unlawful”, the Court of Appeal has been told.

At 15, Begum and her school friends Kadiza Sultana, 15, and Amira Abase, 16, fled London to join ISIS.

She was later found in a refugee camp in 2019 and had her British citizenship withdrawn on national security grounds.

Ms Begum, now 24, lost her legal challenge over the decision to deprive her of her British citizenship earlier this year.

She brought a challenge against the Home Office over the decision at the Special Immigration Appeals Commission (SIAC) but Mr Justice Jay rejected Ms Begum’s legal challenge in February.

On Tuesday Ms Begum’s lawyers began another bid to overturn the decision, which is being opposed by the Home Office.

The tribunal earlier this year found there was “credible suspicion” that Begum had been trafficked to Syria for sexual exploitation.

Now her legal team has claimed the Home Office failed to consider the legal duties Ms Begum may have been owed as a potential trafficking victim.

“[Ms Begum's] trafficking was a mandatory, relevant consideration in determining whether it was conducive to the public good and proportionate to deprive her of citizenship, but it was not considered by the Home Office,” Samantha Knights KC said in written submissions.

"As a consequence, the deprivation decision was unlawful."

Read more: Calls for Israel-Hamas ceasefire grow as UN chief warns situation in Gaza 'worsening by the hour'

Read more: Care home residents treated 'like exhibits in reptile museum' Covid inquiry told

Ms Knights also pointed to another instance of a group of schoolgirls from Tower Hamlets who had been radicalised but were successfully stopped from joining ISIS after prompt action from police and the courts.

“In contrast in (Begum’s) case there was no State protection”, Ms Knights told the court.

“SIAC found that there were arguable State failures by the police, the school, and the local authority to take reasonable preventative measures to protect (her) from being trafficked.

“The UK has since failed to investigate these State failures, and Ms Begum has been provided with no protection or recovery services by the UK authorities.”

Ms Knights said these State failures could have also have contributed to Ms Begum’s trafficking.

Sir James Eadie KC said in written submissions: "The fact that someone is radicalised, and may have been manipulated, is not inconsistent with the assessment that they pose a national security risk.

"Ms Begum contends that national security should not be a 'trump' card. But the public should not be exposed to risks to national security because events and circumstances have conspired to give rise to that risk."

He continued: “An individual could have been manipulated, radicalised, and have her travel to ISIL-controlled territory facilitated by someone else.

“However, that would not touch the assessment that the individual also posed a real risk to national security, whether or not as a result of those same circumstances.”

The hearing is expected to last three days.