A volunteer at Baitul Aman mosque in Bethnal Green says the former IS bride should be given a ‘second chance’ (Picture: PA)
Shamima Begum’s old neighbours in East London have said she should be given a ‘second chance’ and allowed to come home.
A British-born woman of Bangladeshi ancestry, Begum made headlines in 2015 when, aged just 15, she and two other students at Bethnal Green Academy travelled to Syria with the help of an Islamic State smuggler.
Once there, she married a member of the terrorist group with whom she subsequently had three children, all of whom have since died.
Yesterday, Begum lost an appeal to have her British citizenship reinstated, after the UK government stripped it from her in 2019.
Bisher, a volunteer at Baitul Aman mosque in Begum’s home of Bethnal Green, said many people in the area believe she deserves the opportunity to return.
He told The Telegraph: ‘She would be welcomed back. She was young, she made mistakes, she was all repented and wants society to accept her again.
‘I think it’s only fair that she’s given a second chance. She has been punished enough.’
He added: ‘I think the Government wants to make an example of people without taking into consideration their age… how they were influenced, her background, why she was influenced, what was lacking in her life.’
Begum left the UK with two other 15-year-old girls in 2015 and would later marry a member of Islamic State (Picture: PA)
Speaking to the newspaper from a local coffee shop, Darcey Houston said: ‘It’s disgusting how she was treated, no young girl naturally would be put through that, and if it was someone who was white it would have been a completely different story.
‘I think it really reinforces and shows that we’re not welcoming people.’
More Trending
She added: ‘It indicates that the public just didn’t see her as British even though she was born and raised here. Because of her religion and race she was never going to be seen as British.’
However, others disagree with the idea of letting Begum back into the country.
Jim Ahmed, a 60-year-old boxing coach, said: ‘She was old enough to know between right and wrong.
‘I don’t have any sympathy for her.’
Shamima Begum’s legal battle with the Government explained
What was the challenge?
Ms Begum originally brought a legal bid against the Home Office over then-home secretary Sir Sajid Javid’s decision to strip her of her British citizenship on national security grounds in February 2019.
The case was heard at a specialist tribunal, the Special Immigration Appeals Commission (SIAC), sitting in central London.
Last February, members of the tribunal dismissed Ms Begum’s challenge on all grounds, with judge Mr Justice Jay finding that ‘reasonable people will differ’ over the circumstances of Ms Begum’s case.
Following that decision, Ms Begum appealed against the SIAC’s findings at the Court of Appeal in October 2023.
Three appeal judges dismissed this appeal in a ruling on Friday.
What did the Court of Appeal decide?
In a 42-page public judgment, Lady Chief Justice Baroness Carr said the decision to deprive Ms Begum of her citizenship was lawful.
The senior judge said SIAC could lawfully find ‘that the issue of whether and to what extent Ms Begum’s travel to Syria had been voluntary was within the expertise of the intelligence agencies advising the Secretary of State’.
Baroness Carr, sitting with Lord Justice Bean and Lady Justice Whipple, also found Sir Sajid ‘was aware of the circumstances of her departure to Syria, and the likelihood that she was a child victim of others who wished to exploit her for sexual or extremist reasons’ when he made the decision to remove her citizenship.
What happened before?
Friday marks another major judgment in Ms Begum’s case.
In a preliminary ruling in February 2020, the SIAC ruled the decision to deprive Ms Begum of her British citizenship was lawful as Ms Begum was ‘a citizen of Bangladesh by descent’ at the time of the decision.
The tribunal also found that she could not ‘play any meaningful part in her appeal and that, to that extent, the appeal will not be fair and effective’.
Ms Begum took her case to the Court of Appeal over whether she could return to the UK for the main challenge.
After the Court of Appeal ruled that she could return to the UK in July 2020, the Home Office challenged this decision at the Supreme Court.
In February 2021, the UK’s highest court said that Ms Begum should not be granted leave to enter the UK to pursue her appeal against the deprivation of her British citizenship.
In the SIAC’s 2023 judgment, Mr Justice Jay said the Supreme Court’s ruling had ‘complex ramifications’.
What happens next?
The question of whether Ms Begum and her lawyers attempt to bring a Supreme Court challenge over Friday’s decision remains to be answered, with a hearing over the consequences of the ruling due in the coming weeks.
Asked outside of court whether they intend to go to the Supreme Court, Ms Begum’s lawyers said they were not sure, as they had only received the judgment on Friday morning.
To appeal against the Court of Appeal’s decision, Ms Begum’s lawyers would first have to ask for the green light to go to the UK’s highest court, as there is no automatic right of challenge.
What has the Government said?
The Home Office said it is ‘pleased’ the court has ruled against Shamima Begum.
In a statement, a spokesperson said: ‘We are pleased that the Court of Appeal has found in favour of our position in this case.
‘Our priority remains maintaining the safety and security of the UK and we will robustly defend any decision made in doing so.’
And Downing Street also welcomed the Court of Appeal’s decision.
A No 10 spokeswoman told reporters: ‘We’re pleased the court has found in favour of the Government. Beyond that I would just say that our priority remains on maintaining the safety and security of the UK.
‘We’ll always take the strongest possible action to protect our national security and we never take decisions around deprivation (of citizenship) lightly.’
Sir Sajid reposted a previous statement he had made about Ms Begum’s case after the SIAC’s ruling last year.
In the post from February 2023, he said: ‘I welcome today’s court ruling, which has again upheld my decision to remove an individual’s citizenship on national security grounds.
‘This is a complex case, but home secretaries should have the power to prevent anyone entering our country who is assessed to pose a threat to it.’
Get in touch with our news team by emailing us at webnews@metro.co.uk.
For more stories like this, check our news page.