Why have the British Govn. not rescinded Muslim's passports?

Why have the British Govn. not rescinded Muslim's passports?

Author
Discussion

sneijder

5,221 posts

234 months

Sunday 19th October 2014
quotequote all
They are being pulled / valid visas being voided.

Carrier Alerts are issued to airlines etc. with information on who not to accept, they typically are holding valid documents but no longer desired back in, or in at all.

There's been more and more alerts issued recently due to IS and whatnot.

br d

8,396 posts

226 months

Sunday 19th October 2014
quotequote all
With our border "control" it hardly matters. They can just cross out "Ahmed Patel" and "Syria" on the passport and scribble "Terry Smith" underneath it in red biro. In you come son.

HarryW

15,150 posts

269 months

Sunday 19th October 2014
quotequote all
Some cross purposes going on here. the fact they hold a UK passport means they have already proved their entitlement. The position I'm coming from is not to remove their nationality but just their privilege of travel with their UK passport. Nationality is a completely different question, I don't care if they are 2nd or 100th generation residents.

Eclassy

1,201 posts

122 months

Sunday 19th October 2014
quotequote all
HarryW said:
Some cross purposes going on here. the fact they hold a UK passport means they have already proved their entitlement. The position I'm coming from is not to remove their nationality but just their privilege of travel with their UK passport. Nationality is a completely different question, I don't care if they are 2nd or 100th generation residents.
This makes more sense. I believe this is already happening and they probably dont need new powers to do this with terrorists. Someone mentioned the football hooligan example.




CAFEDEAD

222 posts

115 months

Sunday 19th October 2014
quotequote all
How many thousand British passport holders have gone out to the Middle East in the last year?

A list of people with rescinded passports would be a green light to anyone not on it to return strapped up with as much explosive as they can get through a third world airport.

Or we could just leave them wondering if anyone's noticed what they're up to and pick up those we have at the airport if they do choose to try and return.

smegmore

3,091 posts

176 months

Sunday 19th October 2014
quotequote all
CAFEDEAD said:
How many thousand British passport holders have gone out to the Middle East in the last year?

A list of people with rescinded passports would be a green light to anyone not on it to return strapped up with as much explosive as they can get through a third world airport.

Or we could just leave them wondering if anyone's noticed what they're up to and pick up those we have at the airport if they do choose to try and return.
(My bold)

And then what, give them an ASBO?

Time to take the gloves off IMO.

Variomatic

2,392 posts

161 months

Sunday 19th October 2014
quotequote all
davepoth said:
The main reason is that without passports they will either use a fake one or not use one at all, and then we'll have no idea when they come back to the UK. The scanner they use at the airport is tied to all the databases. So while it seems like a nice idea, it's really pretty stupid.
Sadly, a lot of Daily Maily reactions are based on the lunatic premise that wrongdoers will follow the same rules as the rest of us. We wouldn't get false documents to travel, so neither would they. We wouldn't sneak in & out of the country avoiding ports, so no-one would.

Same applies to quite a few things that have made it into law like the SORN system and CIE. The hardcore tax or insurance dodger is barely inconvenienced by it, but it makes good headlines.

Pip1968

Original Poster:

1,348 posts

204 months

Monday 20th October 2014
quotequote all
Here is a good example http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-london-29642584 .

In short:-
A mother whose son joined a militant group linked to IS in Syria has described how she travelled to Turkey and managed to persuade him to return home.

Her son converted to Islam three years ago at the age of 18 after attending talks at his local mosque and researching the religion online.

"My son came to Islam through his own decision, he wasn't forced or anything like that," she said.

However after seeing reports of the conflict in Syria, he secretly travelled to the country to join a militant group linked to IS.

And the best bit (read it as you will although being a cynic the words NHS and free come to mind):-

Her son had been in Syria for four months when he decided to try and make his way home. However, he suffered a back injury in crossfire between two rival factions and is still receiving treatment for his wounds.

"He was traumatised and in quite a fragile state," she said.

After returning to the UK her son was questioned by the Metropolitan Police.

The son was also approached by officials from MI5 but she said the contact had made it hard for her son to adjust to life back in London.

"My son felt pressurised and quite fragile," she said. "It made him quite mistrusting, a bit paranoid."

Why should someone fighting a terror campaign be allowed free treatment on the NHS let alone be allowed back?

Pip

Edited by Pip1968 on Monday 20th October 19:08

loose cannon

6,029 posts

241 months

Monday 20th October 2014
quotequote all
Terminator X said:
Let them go and don't let them back is surely a better policy?

TX.
The best and only option !

Variomatic

2,392 posts

161 months

Monday 20th October 2014
quotequote all
loose cannon said:
Terminator X said:
Let them go and don't let them back is surely a better policy?

TX.
The best and only option !
Yay! How to breed stateless terrorists who have nothing to loose. Cracking plan, Grommet!

Sir Humphrey

387 posts

123 months

Tuesday 21st October 2014
quotequote all
davepoth said:
The main reason is that without passports they will either use a fake one or not use one at all, and then we'll have no idea when they come back to the UK. The scanner they use at the airport is tied to all the databases. So while it seems like a nice idea, it's really pretty stupid.

Belgium can make a little stand but it has no value because Belgium has no border controls at which it can stop people transiting the EU. We still do, fortunately.
Yes but people want to see the government take action. Never mind that the action involved makes the problem worse (as government intervention normally does), we can worry about that later and fix the problem with more government.

Not that these people have actually been found guilty of a crime (as far as I know travelling to Syria isn't a crime).

nikaiyo2

4,704 posts

195 months

Tuesday 21st October 2014
quotequote all
Pip1968 said:
Here is a good example http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-london-29642584 .

In short:-
A mother whose son joined a militant group linked to IS in Syria has described how she travelled to Turkey and managed to persuade him to return home.

Her son converted to Islam three years ago at the age of 18 after attending talks at his local mosque and researching the religion online.

"My son came to Islam through his own decision, he wasn't forced or anything like that," she said.

However after seeing reports of the conflict in Syria, he secretly travelled to the country to join a militant group linked to IS.

And the best bit (read it as you will although being a cynic the words NHS and free come to mind):-

Her son had been in Syria for four months when he decided to try and make his way home. However, he suffered a back injury in crossfire between two rival factions and is still receiving treatment for his wounds.

"He was traumatised and in quite a fragile state," she said.

After returning to the UK her son was questioned by the Metropolitan Police.

The son was also approached by officials from MI5 but she said the contact had made it hard for her son to adjust to life back in London.

"My son felt pressurised and quite fragile," she said. "It made him quite mistrusting, a bit paranoid."

Why should someone fighting a terror campaign be allowed free treatment on the NHS let alone be allowed back?

Pip

Edited by Pip1968 on Monday 20th October 19:08
Why was he not put up against a wall at Heathrow and dealt with in the correct manner (thinking bullet and back of head?)

He went to a foreign land to fight against our nations interests, IS do not wear a uniform, do not observe the laws of war, so he is Francs-tireurs and summary execution is a treatment the Geneva convention accepts for this class of combatant.

paranoid airbag

2,679 posts

159 months

Tuesday 21st October 2014
quotequote all
nikaiyo2 said:
Why was he not put up against a wall at Heathrow and dealt with in the correct manner (thinking bullet and back of head?)

He went to a foreign land to fight against our nations interests, IS do not wear a uniform, do not observe the laws of war, so he is Francs-tireurs and summary execution is a treatment the Geneva convention accepts for this class of combatant.
After a quick look, it does seem we can in fact do that, which is a pleasant suprise, though IANAL. Though that leads to the question: what mechanisms are actually in place to decide this?

i.e. what's there to stop a disgruntled security official classifying the guy who's porking his wife as a "terrorist" leading to a nasty suprise on his return from majorca? Or the bloke with new evidence of parliamentary corruption? And no, no safeguard that only works after someone's been executed is good enough. Possibly that such an action is only legal in a combat zone?

BlackLabel

13,251 posts

123 months

Sunday 23rd November 2014
quotequote all
bbc said:
A Muslim convert, stripped of his British citizenship because of alleged extremism, is appealing to the Supreme Court that he has been left stateless.

The man, only identified as "B2", lost his British citizenship in 2011.

The home secretary used nationality powers to withdraw his citizenship because of his alleged activity.

Supreme Court justices must decide whether the man was left without any nationality, which is illegal under international law.

The hearing comes ahead of Parliament debating controversial counter-terrorism proposals that would allow the Home Secretary to ban British nationals from returning to the UK when they are thought to have been involved in terrorism overseas.

Home Secretary Theresa May has long-standing powers to strip someone of their British nationality when the individual has another citizenship.
'Active threat'

In this unusual case, B2 was born in Vietnam and came to the UK when he was 12 years old with his parents.

Six years later, they were granted British nationality. B2 studied design and communications at college and when he was 21, converted to Islam.

The home secretary's security case against him is that he became a follower of al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP) and in 2010 went to its base in Yemen, then run by an influential American-Yemeni preacher, Anwar al-Awlaki.

AQAP followers have been behind a number of bomb plots and produced Inspire, an English-language jihadist magazine, which was designed and presented to attract more recruits from the West.
line

Analysis

by Clive Coleman, BBC legal affairs correspondent

B2's case represents legal scrutiny of another aspect of the government's range of measures to deal with those suspected of involvement in terrorism.

Last week the prime minister announced plans to bar suspected British jihadist fighters from re-entering the UK unless they agreed to strict terms.

The announcement of these temporary exclusion orders which could last up to two years led to a debate about the legality of those orders, and of any measures that render a UK citizen "stateless".

B2's case raises the issue of the home secretary's power to deprive naturalised UK citizens of citizenship when another government disowns them - as the Vietnamese government has done in B2's case.

The British government claims that the Vietnamese decision to disown B2 is wrong in Vietnamese law.

So the Supreme Court will decide if citizens in B2's position are rendered stateless when a foreign government has disowned them "unlawfully".

It will also consider whether B2, as a national of a nation of the EU, can be deprived of his EU citizenship - and whether it is proportionate to do so if no other state recognizes him as a citizen.
line

In December 2011, Mrs May made an order stripping B2 of his nationality, saying that he was involved in terrorist-related activity.

Court papers say that MI5 had assessed he posed an "active threat to the safety and security of the UK and its inhabitants".

Two days later, Mrs May served a second order that he be deported to Vietnam and he was placed in detention.

The Vietnamese government deny that B2 is one of its citizens. But the British government says the Vietnamese have got their own law wrong - and therefore B2 is not stateless.

B2 appealed against his loss of citizenship to the Special Immigration Appeals Commission, a semi-secret court that deals with cases involving national security, saying he had been left stateless.

The Siac panel agreed - but the Home Secretary later won an appeal after arguing that Vietnamese government had got its own law wrong in denying that B2 was one of its citizens.

After ministers initially lost this case and another similar challenge, the government asked Parliament to amend the law, so that the home secretary could rescind someone's citizenship if officials believed that person could turn to another nationality, even if they did not possess it at the time that they lost their British status.

The Supreme Court hearing in the case is expected to last two days with a judgement coming later.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-30091265

BlackLabel

13,251 posts

123 months

Friday 26th February 2016
quotequote all
independent said:
Asian-born sex abusers will be stripped of their UK citizenship and deported at the end of their sentences under a new Home Office drive, The Independent can reveal.

Theresa May, the Home Secretary, is planning to significantly increase her department’s use of legal powers that allow serious criminals with dual nationality to have their British citizenship withdrawn, Whitehall sources say.

Until now, the powers have predominately been used to remove the UK passports of terrorists and terrorist sympathisers.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/asian-sex-abusers-to-be-stripped-of-uk-citizenship-and-deported-a6896051.html

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-manchester-35...

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-manchester-35...





Mr_B

10,480 posts

243 months

Friday 26th February 2016
quotequote all
BlackLabel said:
independent said:
Asian-born sex abusers will be stripped of their UK citizenship and deported at the end of their sentences under a new Home Office drive, The Independent can reveal.

Theresa May, the Home Secretary, is planning to significantly increase her department’s use of legal powers that allow serious criminals with dual nationality to have their British citizenship withdrawn, Whitehall sources say.

Until now, the powers have predominately been used to remove the UK passports of terrorists and terrorist sympathisers.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/asian-sex-abusers-to-be-stripped-of-uk-citizenship-and-deported-a6896051.html

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-manchester-35...

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-manchester-35...


Standard government 'getting tough' press release, that when it comes to actually being applied in court will fail I suspect in most cases when it meets human rights law.