Lawyers for former jihadi bride Shamima Begum have lost an appeal against the government’s decision to strip her of her British citizenship. Jihadi bride, Shamima Begum, lost a legal challenge against the UK government’s decision to revoke her British citizenship. This verdict was announced by three court of appeal judges.
Begum married an ISIS fighter and had children with him after leaving her home in east London at the age of 15. Subsequently, her husband and children died. She was discovered in a Syrian refugee camp in February 2019. The then-home secretary, Sajid Javid, stripped Begum of her citizenship due to national security grounds. Begum previously lost a challenge against this decision at the Special Immigration Appeals Commission (SIAC) in the prior year.
Three judges dismissed her appeal after releasing a 42-page ruling. The judges ruled that she was the “author of her own misfortune.” According to the Ruling, Baroness Carr stated, “The only task of the court was to assess whether the deprivation decision was unlawful. Since it was not, Ms Begum’s appeal is dismissed.”
At the hearing in October, Begum’s lawyer, Samantha Knights, KC, said the government failed to consider the legal duties owed to Begum as a potential victim of trafficking. However, Baroness Carr said, “We are not persuaded that there was any obligation on the Secretary of State to take into account the possibility that there might be a duty to investigate the circumstances of Ms Begum’s trafficking, alternatively, to consider whether any such investigation as might be required would be enhanced by her presence in this country.”
In its ruling in 2023 SIAC concluded there were “arguable breaches of duty” by state bodies in not preventing Begum from traveling to Syria. However, the Court of Appeal has not found these to be irrelevant to the question of whether she might pose a national security risk and could therefore have her citizenship revoked. The Home Office commented, “Our priority remains maintaining the safety and security of the UK and we will robustly defend any decision made in doing so.”