Read on Twitter
Highly significant decision by the courts here which says that Begum can return to challenge her deprivation of citizenship but *not* that her claim would then necessarily succeed. This seems to revolve around the fairness of procedural rules on appeal; not the issue itself. 1/ https://twitter.com/skynews/status/1283698243533262848">https://twitter.com/skynews/s...
Begum is, of course, one of the now famous “Bethnal Green Girls” a group of three women aged 15-16 who travelled to Islamic State together in 2014. Much has been made of their age at the time of travel. 2/
The government’s predicament is an unenviable one. It worries about bringing IS suspects home because of difficulties relating to the admissibility of evidence gathered from war zones like Raqqah and elsewhere. 3/
Ordinary rules relating to things such as the continuity, or gathering, of evidence simply don’t apply. Or, quite simply, they don’t want to give away intelligence tools/tricks used to collect covert evidence on suspects. 4/
So there is a very real fear that bringing suspects home will result in acquittal. Clearly, that’s a highly undesirable outcome. Public opinion won’t tolerate it and the resulting threat to national security will be acute. 5/
Of course, not all Islamic State members are the same. We need to disaggregate the men, women, and children. The children are clearly innocent and it’s a moral stain on our collective consciousness that we’ve allowed them to remain in such squalid conditions. 6/
The women are altogether more tricky. They didn’t fight on the frontlines but they did have agency and many supported the war effort of Islamic State in different ways. Indeed, just by being there they engaged in “propaganda of the deed.” 7/
The men now claim they didn’t fight - but that’s simply untrue. Overwhelmingly, they fought, even if they later came to disagree with Islamic State on various points of ideology. 8/
The case of the Bethnal Green girls is emotive and complex because of their ages at the time of travel. The points I’m making above are about the broader points of principle. What do you do about a potential Islamic State returnee? 9/
The danger is that you can’t secure a proper conviction against them. Then you have these people walking our streets, which is unfathomable. Or you secure a conviction on a lesser charge and they’re out in a few years. Again, not ideal. 10/
If you do convict them, then what? Do you disperse them and risk them radicalising other prisoners? Do you give them celebrity status as Islamic State returnees? Or do you gather them all together and risk concentrating the hardcore in one place? 11/
The issue of managing terrorist offenders is another complex problem. Now’s a good time to tell you that @ICSR_Centre will be launching a report on this very issue next week, on 22 July. Contact us for more details. 12/
Whilst there’s no good answers the government’s approach - along with that of many other governments - is to simply sit back and wait. The men and women of Islamic State are now mostly held by the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) in northeastern Syria. 13/
Their detention is not secure. The camps where women and children are held are riddled with corruption and people escape all the time. The men are held in more secure facilities but unrest is common. 14/
Just last week, Ishak Mostefaoui, from London was killed in an SDF detention centre. He had studied at the university of Westminster (along with a number of others) prior to travelling. 15/
What happens if people escape and we lose track of them? Then what? Consider this: Abdel-Majed Abdel Bary, a onetime rapper from London, escaped Syria and was only recently detained in Spain. That’s how far away from Syria he managed to get. 16/
Although Abdel-Majed Abdel Bary was not an escapee from SDF custody, his case shows how people are able to move around and how far they can get, once we don’t know where they are. Clearly, some oversight is desirable - but, again, who does this and how should it be done? 17/
As has been the case with the Syrian conflict from the outset, there are no easy solutions and no quick fixes. It’s a mess. Our policy has been one of managing (rather than resolving) different risks. 18/
Bringing Islamic State detainees home is something clearly fraught with difficulty and danger. Rightfully, there is reticence to do so. But leaving them in theatre is also problematic because they can escape and we lose sight of them 19/
Begum’s victory in the courts today once again underscores the need to think more creatively about a long term solution to the problem of Islamic State detainees. /Ends
