jamie_c21

The revocation of Begum's citizenship sets a dangerous precedent for the UK allowing an individual to become de jure stateless.

Ad hoc denationalisation undermines the spirit of international law and constitutes a dereliction of duty to deal with home-grown terrorism. When denationalisation leaves an individual de jure stateless, citizenship should be an unconditional status unless an individual consents to surrendering it, even if that individual has acted in ways seriously prejudicial to UK interests (as Begum is British by birth-right, without dual citizenship).

It should be noted that this issue is bound up with public sentiment considerations -- citizens tend to imagine citizenship as denser than a mere legal obligation for the state, comprising broader notions of loyalty and allegiance, and terrorism obviously elicits an emotional response.

However, there is very limited instrumental value in denationalisation with regards to national security, and it weakens the status of citizenship by making it contingent upon citizens' behavioural performance. Further, dealing with transnational terrorist networks requires extensive coordination between various states and governance systems -- dumping responsibility for Begum on Bangladesh's lap through a legal loophole is not conducive to international cooperation. Any actions that abandon this commitment serve to undermine the fight against Daesh in the long-term.

A policy of repatriation and prosecution with due process should be invoked if Begum is found to have committed war crimes or crimes against humanity. After she has served her time, the process of rehabilitation and deradicalisation can then begin on UK soil. This would not allow Begum to evade accountability for her actions in Syria, and would fulfil the UK government's obligations under international law.