This article is from the source 'nytimes' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.
You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.nytimes.com/2014/05/15/world/europe/britain-broadens-power-to-strip-terrorism-suspects-of-citizenship.html
The article has changed 5 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.
| Version 2 | Version 3 |
|---|---|
| Britain Expands Power to Strip Citizenship From Terrorism Suspects | Britain Expands Power to Strip Citizenship From Terrorism Suspects |
| (35 minutes later) | |
| LONDON — Britain has passed legislation that allows the government to strip terrorism suspects of their citizenship even if it renders them stateless, taking the country’s already sweeping powers to revoke nationality a step further. | LONDON — Britain has passed legislation that allows the government to strip terrorism suspects of their citizenship even if it renders them stateless, taking the country’s already sweeping powers to revoke nationality a step further. |
| After four months of wrangling, the House of Lords, the Parliament’s upper chamber, approved on Monday a clause in a new immigration bill that removes a previous restriction on leaving individuals without citizenship. The bill became law on Wednesday, after receiving royal assent. | After four months of wrangling, the House of Lords, the Parliament’s upper chamber, approved on Monday a clause in a new immigration bill that removes a previous restriction on leaving individuals without citizenship. The bill became law on Wednesday, after receiving royal assent. |
| Britain has been one of the few Western countries that can revoke citizenship and its associated rights from dual citizens, even native-born Britons, if they are suspected or convicted of acts of terrorism or disloyalty. The government has stepped up its use of this tactic in recent years. In two cases, suspects have subsequently been killed in American drone strikes. | Britain has been one of the few Western countries that can revoke citizenship and its associated rights from dual citizens, even native-born Britons, if they are suspected or convicted of acts of terrorism or disloyalty. The government has stepped up its use of this tactic in recent years. In two cases, suspects have subsequently been killed in American drone strikes. |
| The new rules will broaden these so-called deprivation powers to include Britons who have no second nationality, provided that they were naturalized as adults. If the home secretary deems that their citizenship is “seriously prejudicial to the vital interests of the United Kingdom,” it can be taken away, effective immediately, without a public hearing. A suspect whose citizenship rights have been stripped has 28 days to appeal to a special immigration court. | The new rules will broaden these so-called deprivation powers to include Britons who have no second nationality, provided that they were naturalized as adults. If the home secretary deems that their citizenship is “seriously prejudicial to the vital interests of the United Kingdom,” it can be taken away, effective immediately, without a public hearing. A suspect whose citizenship rights have been stripped has 28 days to appeal to a special immigration court. |
| Earlier this year, lawmakers in the upper house rejected a version of the provision, questioning its effectiveness in improving national security and voicing concerns about the moral implications of leaving people without the basic rights associated with citizenship. But after a number of concessions by the government, the clause was approved by 286 votes to 193. | |
| Home Secretary Theresa May has agreed that the new power should be reviewed every three years by a government-appointed expert and said she would use the provision only if she had “reasonable grounds for believing” a suspect is able to obtain the citizenship of another country. | |
| Some lawmakers questioned whether the provision would work in practice. “Would another country seriously consider giving nationality, even to someone who might have the ability to apply for nationality of that country, if it knew that British citizenship had been removed on the grounds that the person was believed to be in some way linked to, or to condone, international terrorism?” asked Helena Kennedy, a member of the House of Lords for the opposition Labour Party. | Some lawmakers questioned whether the provision would work in practice. “Would another country seriously consider giving nationality, even to someone who might have the ability to apply for nationality of that country, if it knew that British citizenship had been removed on the grounds that the person was believed to be in some way linked to, or to condone, international terrorism?” asked Helena Kennedy, a member of the House of Lords for the opposition Labour Party. |
| Under previous legislation, 42 people since 2006 have been stripped of their British citizenship, 20 of them last year, according to a freedom of information request filed by the Bureau of Investigative Journalism, a research organization at City University London that first drew attention to the practice in December 2012. | Under previous legislation, 42 people since 2006 have been stripped of their British citizenship, 20 of them last year, according to a freedom of information request filed by the Bureau of Investigative Journalism, a research organization at City University London that first drew attention to the practice in December 2012. |
| The new legislation appears to be inspired in part by a specific case in which the government did not get its way. A spokesman for the Home Office, John Taylor, said this week that the case of Hilal al-Jedda, an Iraqi-born naturalized Briton who lost his British nationality in 2007 after being detained in Iraq on suspicion of smuggling explosives, had highlighted a “loophole” in the law. | The new legislation appears to be inspired in part by a specific case in which the government did not get its way. A spokesman for the Home Office, John Taylor, said this week that the case of Hilal al-Jedda, an Iraqi-born naturalized Briton who lost his British nationality in 2007 after being detained in Iraq on suspicion of smuggling explosives, had highlighted a “loophole” in the law. |
| Out of 15 appeals, the case of Mr. Jedda is the only one to have succeeded. Britain’s Supreme Court ruled in October that Mr. Jedda could not be deprived of his British nationality because it would make him stateless: Iraq bans dual citizenship and canceled Mr. Jedda’s passport in 2000 when he was naturalized in Britain. The British government was forced to reinstate his citizenship on Oct. 9, 2013. | Out of 15 appeals, the case of Mr. Jedda is the only one to have succeeded. Britain’s Supreme Court ruled in October that Mr. Jedda could not be deprived of his British nationality because it would make him stateless: Iraq bans dual citizenship and canceled Mr. Jedda’s passport in 2000 when he was naturalized in Britain. The British government was forced to reinstate his citizenship on Oct. 9, 2013. |
| But on Nov. 1, Mr. Jedda was stripped of his nationality a second time, and in January the Home Office rushed before Parliament the amendment allowing deprivation even if it results in statelessness. | But on Nov. 1, Mr. Jedda was stripped of his nationality a second time, and in January the Home Office rushed before Parliament the amendment allowing deprivation even if it results in statelessness. |