Shamima Begum can only have effective appeal from the UK, Supreme Court hears

The "only effective means available" of ensuring Shamima Begum has a fair and effective appeal against the removal of her British citizenship is to allow her to return to the UK, the Supreme Court has heard.

Shamima Begum was 15 when she and two other east London schoolgirls travelled to Syria to join the so-called Islamic State group (IS) in February 2015.

Her British citizenship was revoked on national security grounds shortly after she was found, nine months pregnant, in a Syrian refugee camp in February last year.

Ms Begum, now 21 and currently in the al-Roj camp in northern Syria, where conditions are said by her lawyers to be "dire", is challenging the Home Office's decision to remove her British citizenship and wants to be allowed to return to the UK to pursue her appeal.

In July, the Court of Appeal ruled that "the only way in which she can have a fair and effective appeal is to be permitted to come into the United Kingdom to pursue her appeal".

9 PHOTOS
Shamima Begum
See Gallery
Shamima Begum
Shamima Begum reacting to question in news interview
BEST QUALITY AVAILABLE Undated handout still taken from CCTV issued by the Metropolitan Police of east London schoolgirl Shamima Begum, going through security at Gatwick airport, before catching a flight to Turkey in 2015 to join the Islamic State group, she is now heavily pregnant and wants to come home.
BEST QUALITY AVAILABLE Undated handout file still taken from CCTV issued by the Metropolitan Police of (left to right) 15-year-old Amira Abase, Kadiza Sultana, 16, and Shamima Begum before catching a flight to Turkey in 2015 to join the Islamic State group, Shamima Begum is now heavily pregnant and wants to come home.
BEST QUALITY AVAILABLE Undated handout photo issued by the Metropolitan Police of east London schoolgirl Shamima Begum, who left Britain as a 15-year-old to join the Islamic State group and is now heavily pregnant and wants to come home.
Sahima Begum (sister of Shamima Begum) and Abase Hussen (father of Amira Abase ) leave the Houses of Parliament in London, after giving evidence to the Home Affairs Select Committee after three schoolgirls are feared to have joined Islamic State in war-torn Syria.
Handout comp of stills taken from CCTV issued by the Metropolitan Police of (left to right) Kadiza Sultana,16, Shamima Begum,15 and 15-year-old Amira Abase going through security at Gatwick airport, before they caught their flight to Turkey on Tuesday. The three schoolgirls believed to have fled to Syria to join Islamic State.
The famiiles of Amira Abase and Shamima Begum after being interviewed by the media at New Scotland Yard, central London, as the relatives of three missing schoolgirls believed to have fled to Syria to join Islamic State have pleaded for them to return home.
LONDON, ENGLAND - MARCH 10 : In this photo taken from video, Shamima Begum's sister Sahima Begum attends an evidence session at Parliaments Home Affairs Select Committee in the House of Commons, on three girls who are believed to have travelled to Syria to join Daesh (Islamic State of Iraq and Levant) in London, England on March 10, 2015. (Photo by House of Commons/Anadolu Agency/Getty Images)
LONDON, ENGLAND - MARCH 10 : In this photo taken from video, (L-R) Kadiza Sultana's Cousin Fahmida Aziz, Shamima Begum's sister Sahima Begum, Amira Abase's father Hussen Abase and Lawyer Tasnime Akunjee representing the families of the three schoolgirls missing in Syria attend an evidence session at Parliaments Home Affairs Select Committee in the House of Commons, on three girls who are believed to have travelled to Syria to join Daesh (Islamic State of Iraq and Levant) in London, England on March 10, 2015. (Photo by House of Commons/Anadolu Agency/Getty Images)
HIDE CAPTION
SHOW CAPTION
of
SEE ALL
BACK TO SLIDE

However, the Home Office argues that allowing her to return to the UK "would create significant national security risks" and expose the public to "an increased risk of terrorism".

On the second day of a remote hearing on Tuesday, Ms Begum's lawyers argued that she "cannot play a meaningful part in her appeal" and must be allowed to return to the UK to challenge the removal of her citizenship.

Her barrister Lord Pannick QC said that, if Ms Begum could not return to the UK to pursue an effective appeal, "the deprivation appeal must be allowed" as there is "no other fair or just step that can be taken".

He told the court that the Government "cannot maintain a decision to deprive Ms Begum of her citizenship unless a means can be conferred on her, without unreasonable delay, (to have) a meaningful opportunity to appeal".

Lord Pannick added: "Leave to enter (the UK) is the only effective such means available."

Lord Pannick said in written submissions that the Syrian Democratic Forces, which control the al-Roj camp, "do not permit visits from lawyers nor do they permit detainees to speak to lawyers".

He said Ms Begum was therefore "unable to give instructions on any detailed issues of fact" or review the national security case relied on by the Home Office in relation to "IS and the situation in Syria during the relevant period of time".

He added that the case against Ms Begum was "no more than that she travelled to Syria and 'aligned with IS'".

He said: "It is not alleged that she fought, trained or participated in any terrorist activities, nor that she had any role within IS.

"It is not said that she has expressed or harbours any ill will against the United Kingdom."

On Monday, Sir James Eadie QC, representing the Home Office, told the court: "If you force the Secretary of State to facilitate a return to the UK, or if you allow the substantive appeal, the effect is to create potentially very serious national security concerns."

He said of Ms Begum: "She married an IS fighter, lived in Raqqa, the capital of the self-declared caliphate, and remained with them for about four years until 2019, when she left from, in effect, the last pocket of IS territory in Baghuz."

Sir James argued that individuals who went to Syria to join IS pose a "real and serious" risk to national security "whatever sympathy might be generated by the age of the person when they travelled".

Shamima Begum court appeal
Kadiza Sultana, Shamima Begum and Amira Abase at Gatwick in 2015 (PA)

In written submissions, Sir James said: "This case raises questions as to the balance to be struck between degrees of protection of procedural rights and degrees of protection of the public from terrorism.

"Can it be right that a person who has involved themself in terrorism, and is now abroad and subject to restrictions that affect their ability to participate in domestic proceedings, is able to rely on those self-created impediments to insist on return to the jurisdiction to enable them to participate now in such proceedings?

"Can it be right that they should be able to do so if enabling them to do so runs directly contrary to the most effective protection of the public from the risks of harm through terrorism?"

Kadiza Sultana and Amira Abase, then 16 and 15 respectively, and Ms Begum boarded a flight from Gatwick Airport to Istanbul, Turkey, on February 17 2015, before making their way to Raqqa in Syria.

The three schoolgirls from Bethnal Green Academy left London shortly after Sharmeena Begum, who is no relation, travelled to Syria in December 2014.

Ms Begum claims she married Dutch convert Yago Riedijk 10 days after arriving in IS territory, with all three of her school friends also reportedly marrying foreign IS fighters.

She told The Times last February that she left Raqqa in January 2017 with her husband, but her children, a one-year-old girl and a three-month-old boy, had both since died. Her third child died in the al-Roj camp in March 2019, shortly after he was born.

At the conclusion of the two-day hearing on Tuesday, the Supreme Court's president Lord Reed said the court would deliver its judgment at a later date.

Read Full Story Click here to comment

FROM OUR PARTNERS