The Supreme Court rules that Shamima Begum cannot return to the UK.  Is this a fair ruling?  When she left for Syria to join the Islamic State she was 15 years old and only a child.  As we know children can be brainwashed and also end up doing things they later regret.  I feel that she should be allowed to return to the UK and be then held accountable for her actions, including an appropriate punishment and rehabilitation.  What if she has been a young white girl who had say converted to Islam and then ran away, would she have been treated in the same way? Would have she been allowed to return? I think we can guess what the answer would be.  We could perhaps learn from her in terms of her thought process as to what made her go and leave her loved ones so we can prevent other young girls from being drawn into extremism.

Do check the quick survey on the homepage on the MWN Hub - and indicate Yes or No on there too!
 

5 Comments

  • Sabahn

    13/03/2021

    I'd like to start off by saying that what Shamima did was wrong and she should be held accountable. I completely agree with everything you've said. I think she should be allowed back in the UK, considering she was a British citizen and what she did happened when she was young and vulnerable. She should be allowed to have a fair trial. If Shamima were white, I am 100% confident that they would have allowed her back to fight her case and the narrative would be totally different to what everyone is seeing now. Children and young people are groomed all the time and she was a child at the time this all happened. Shamima was clearly groomed. Someone built a relationship with Shamima when she was a 15 years old child. They built trust and emotional connection, so they could manipulate, exploit and abuse her; just like they have been doing to hundred of other young girls. What she did was wrong and no one is saying she should get off scot free. Like you said, she definitely should be held accountable for her actions, including appropriate rehabilitation and punishment. Personally, I think that if Shamia were white it would be a totally different outcome. There is a-lot of proof of institutionalised racism in the UK when it comes to people of colour. I am going to use Shukri Abdi as an example here. This poor child was killed by bullies in her school who happened to be white and they got off scot free. The judge had ruled that 'it was an unfortunate accident' and the case was not properly investigated. Shukri was thrown in a river and she died. In the report Child 1 said to Shukri "if you don't get into that water, I'll kill you"...The coroner said this was not meant with malice...which I believe is biased. Just like these children who killed Shukri Abdi got a trial to fight their cases, Shamima Begum should be allowed to have a fair trial. Were these children not old enough to know better? Just like a child (Shamima) was groomed and called to Syria, she clearly did not know better. We all know that if she were white she would be offered to come back and fight her case, so they should let her back and then give either rehabilitate or give her the appropriate punishment in the UK.

    Reply Report Comment
  • GrannyBibi

    26/02/2021

    I share your concerns and think it is quite telling that people are quick to insist that a 15 year old knew exactly what she was doing (even though there is so much to suggest she is a victim of grooming) and with the same breath are quick to say 18 year old Greta Thunberg doesn't have a clue what she is talking about!

    Reply Report Comment
  • NazminA

    26/02/2021

    Today's decision was not about whether Shamima Begum deserves to be stripped of her citizenship or not but whether she has the right to enter into the UK to fight a case to decide if she deserves to be stripped of citizenship. The Supreme Court decided today that she does not have a right to enter the UK to pursue legal proceedings - despite there being evidence that she cannot have a fair trial (to decide the citizenship issue) if she is still abroad. For me the most concerning part is that the Supreme Court decided that a right to a fair trial does not trump the safety of the public. Now you might think well of course the safety of the public is important but what if where there is a safety issue in the first place is up for question? If someone said to you that you must be incarcerated because you are a mass murderer, would you not want a fair opportunity to have it determined if you are in fact a mass murderer or not? But today we were told that someone who has had their citizenship stripped due to safety/security concerns is not able to question whether there is in fact a safety/security concerns concern because of... wait for it, safety/security concerns. Whether you think Shamima is a victim of grooming or someone fully culpable, she deserves a fair trial - just like we all do. Todays decision is not just about her, its about all our rights and freedoms.

    Reply Report Comment
    • NazminA

      26/02/2021

      Potentially to the ECHR but not sure if they will go that far. The Supreme Court is still yet to decide whether the actual decision of the Home Secretary to strip her British citizenship is legally valid in the first place so technically we still have that to wait for - but the problem is, how does she safely pursue that appeal when she is abroad...

      Report Comment
    • Shai

      26/02/2021

      Thank you for the detailed analysis - is there any appeal process after this ruling

      Report Comment

Join Our Movement

Raise your voice and get connected