Good Idea From Mrs May?

[FredPuli43]

Theresa May has announced that she intends to have the law changed so that terrorist suspects can have their British passports removed even if that means they are stateless. She tried to do this in the case of an Iraqi who had been granted asylum here but then rewarded us by fighting for the enemy. The Supreme Court held that, while he could get the Iraqi government to issue a new Iraqi passport, he would be rendered stateless unless and until he did so. That was beyond her powers [The Times, today, Tuesday]

[jno]

didn't they send people into exile in the Middle Ages without much caring where they went? If I remember correctly they had to take the first boat out; if there wasn't one, they had to wade out into the sea up to their waists every day to show they were trying.

But what does she actually envisage doing with them? She presumably couldn't pack them into a plane because no carrier would accept them without papers. So they'd be stuck here without a passport, which isn't necessarily the desired outcome.

Then again, plenty of people here don't have passports. Does she actually mean removing their citizenship somehow?

[naomi24]

//The Supreme Court held that, while he could get the Iraqi government to issue a new Iraqi passport, he would be rendered stateless unless and until he did so. That was beyond her powers//

In that case, her powers should be extended.

[EDDIE51]

naomi you are suggesting that the government should be above the law?
Perhaps we should extend her powers to allow arrest and execution without trial as well ? We may not like some laws but we have no choice but to abide by them.

[jomifl]

jno, it is possible to leave the country by uther means than plane. The grey funnel line have regular excursions to the coast of Somalia.

[emmie]

yes it is, agree with Naomi.

[sandyRoe]

How did the Star Chamber work? Would it be a good idea to reintroduce it? I can see Theresa May in her motley coat and boots presiding over a process where arbitrary justice was meted out to Johnny Foreigner.

[emmie]

why would we want them back, especially if they not only go and fight but are instrumental in harming other British nationals working overseas.


http://www.arabtimesonline.com/NewsDetails/tabid/96/smid/414/ArticleID/201131/reftab/36/Default.aspx

[naomi24]

//naomi you are suggesting that the government should be above the law? //

No. I'm suggesting the law be changed.

[emmie]

don't understand why the key witnesses the two who were kidnapped cannot give evidence.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2500915/Case-NHS-doctor-accused-kidnapping-British-photographer-Syria-dropped.html?ITO=1490&ns_mchannel=rss&ns_campaign=1490

[jake-the-peg]

You're suggesting that someone should be rendered stateless on suspicion held by someone

No court case - no chance to defend themselves or even hear the charges against them?

Is that what you're suggesting?

[youngmafbog]

it depends what the aim of it is.

If it is to remove British citizenship then simply lock them up as an illegal alien until they have a passport from somewhere eg Iraq in the case above.

If it is to stop them leaving the country to go to terrorist camps etc then it is pointless since it is not difficult to get a passport, nor is it difficult for a single person to come and go around our Island if you really want to.

[youngmafbog]

Jake, if it is a case of National security and there is sufficient evidence (even if it cannot be spouted in Court) then yes that may be the case.

Although I dont think that decision should be down to one person.

[naomi24]

Jake, there are several million Muslims in this country who get on with their lives without incident. The terror suspect who escaped hidden under a burqa must have done something to attract the attention of the authorities – otherwise he wouldn’t have been under surveillance - and would have had no reason to abscond. Frankly, if the security of this country is at risk, to my mind his ‘rights’ do not take precedence.

[jake-the-peg]

That's what I'm trying to get at YMB

There *must* be sufficient evidence - now maybe that can be heard by judges sitting in private

But people *must* be given the opportunity to defend themselves from charges

Otherwise we're just locking people up on the sayso of the home secretary - and that's not the sort of country we are or should be

[naomi24]

//But people *must* be given the opportunity to defend themselves from charges //

Could idea - if you can catch them. ;o)

[naomi24]

Oops! *Good idea*.

[jake-the-peg]

God Naomi you're so scared of a few extremeists

Were you like this with the Irish in the 80's? or is it more to do with your hatred of muslims?

Have a bit of backbone - freedom is worth fighting for - it's worth taking some risks for - otherwise what's the point? you might as well go and live in some central American dictatorship

[weecalf]

Is it near pay rise time for mps they usually come up with summit like this as a sorta ....you have not heard from me lately ..so this is something which will take 14 years to push through ..so vote me back in again .Give us a break

[youngmafbog]

Yes, I do agree with you Jake.

There should always be the opportunity to defend (within reason, ie no dragging through a myriad of courts or the ECHR)

And, as I said above, it should not be down to one person. Especially a political one (from any party or persuasion). but the Judges in question must put National security first in these (what should be) very rare cases.

[naomi24]

Jake, //Have a bit of backbone - freedom is worth fighting for - it's worth taking some risks for - otherwise what's the point? //

Coming from someone who never has a good word for anything British, that just about takes the biscuit!! I am for freedom - freedom for law-abiding people!