A top European court has demanded answers over the UK’s decision to strip Shamima Begum of her citizenship after she travelled to join the so-called Islamic State at the age of 15.
The European Court of Human Rights has asked questions over whether Britain upheld its responsibilities towards victims of trafficking before the home secretary revoked her citizenship in 2019.
Ms Begum travelled from Bethnal Green, east London, to territory held by IS a decade ago.
Ten days after arriving in Syria, she was “married off” to IS fighter Yago Riedijk, a Dutch-born convert to Islam and a convicted terrorist.
She was stripped of her British citizenship in February 2019 on the grounds she posed a threat to national security.
In 2020, the Court of Appeal ruled she should be allowed to return to the UK in order to fairly contest that decision. But a year later the Supreme Court ruled unanimously against bringing Ms Begum back. She remains in a Syrian camp.
A document published by the European court earlier this month shows Ms Begum is challenging the decision under Article 4 of the European Convention on Human Rights – prohibition of slavery and forced labour.
One question among four posed by judges in Strasbourg to the Home Office asks: “Did the Secretary of State have a positive obligation, by virtue of Article 4 of the Convention, to consider whether the applicant had been a victim of trafficking, and whether any duties or obligations to her flowed from that fact, before deciding to deprive her of her citizenship?”
Birnberg Peirce Solicitors, which is representing Ms Begum, said the court’s communication “presents an unprecedented opportunity” for the UK and Ms Begum to “grapple with the significant considerations raised in her case and ignored, sidestepped or violated up to now by previous UK administrations”.
Lawyer Gareth Peirce said: “It is impossible to dispute that a 15-year-old British child was in 2014/15 lured, encouraged and deceived for the purposes of sexual exploitation to leave home and travel to Isil-controlled territory for the known purpose of being given, as a child, to an Isil fighter to propagate children for the Islamic State.
“It is equally impossible not to acknowledge the catalogue of failures to protect a child known for weeks beforehand to be at high risk when a close friend had disappeared to Syria in an identical way and via an identical route.
“It has already been long conceded that the then home secretary, Sajid Javid, who took the precipitous decision in 2019 very publicly to deprive Ms Begum of citizenship, had failed entirely to consider the issues of grooming and trafficking of a school child in London and of the state’s consequent duties.”
She also pointed to the Labour government’s decision to make protections for victims of grooming and trafficking a national priority.
But a Home Office spokesman said any decision made to protect national security would be robustly defended.
“The government will always protect the UK and its citizens,” the spokesman said. “That is why Shamima Begum – who posed a national security threat – had her British citizenship revoked and is unable to return to the UK. We will robustly defend any decision made to protect our national security.”
The Conservatives said Ms Begum should not be allowed back into the UK “under any circumstances”.
Shadow home secretary Chris Philp said: “Begum chose to go and support the violent Islamist extremists of Daesh, who murdered opponents, raped thousands of women and girls and threw people off buildings for being gay.
“She has no place in the UK and our own Supreme Court found that depriving her of citizenship was lawful. It is deeply concerning the European Court of Human Rights is now looking at using the ECHR to make the UK take her back.”
