The supreme court\u2019s decision to allow this formerly British woman to be exiled does more harm to the public interest than bringing her back <\/p>
Shamima Begum was born and brought up in London, as a British citizen. Six years ago, when she was 15, she and two other girls, Amira Abase and Kadiza Sultana, left the UK to join Islamic State. Today, Ms Begum is the widowed mother of three dead children, imprisoned in the al-Roj camp in territory controlled by Syrian Kurds. On Friday, the UK supreme court reversed a decision<\/a> by the court of appeal, judged that she is not entitled to have her British citizenship restored, and that she should not be allowed to return to the UK to fight her case in person.<\/p> These are wrong rulings. The UK is the correct place for an examination of this British-born woman\u2019s mistakes or crimes, however horrific. By exiling her, as the court decided that the then home secretary, Sajid Javid, was entitled to do, the UK is ducking its international responsibilities. Ms Begum cannot properly instruct lawyers. The court held out the faint hope that a \u201cfair hearing\u201d could possibly take place at some future date. In the meantime, it is hard to see why other countries, or non-state actors such as the Syrian Kurds, should have to detain British fighters or their families (around 60 British adults and children<\/a> remain in detention in Syria). For Britain to offload Ms Begum<\/a>, on grounds that this would not make her stateless because her heritage entitles her to apply for citizenship of Bangladesh (where she has never been), is an abuse of position and of history.<\/p> Continue reading...<\/a>\n