Support NeoGAF

[Condom]

They would just further radicalize people in prison if prosecuted here.

Oh and now they'll radicalize people elsewhere, out of sight out of mind am I right? You see how ridiculous this is? International problem require international solutions.

 

[MUnited83]

They would just further radicalize people in prison if prosecuted here.

Yeah, just force another countries to arrest them and get people radicalised in their prisons, that's quite the amazing solution.

 

[Red Liquorice]

If you willingly go to join IS, anything less than a missile being dropped on you is too leniant.

Sounds good to me.

 

[Syder]

Like I said earlier in the thread, if it can be proved beyond reasonable doubt someone joined a terrorist group willingly I don't see what's wrong with making them stateless, either that or increase sentences for joining those groups to life.

 

[Prez]

Give them all a life sentence and build a prison just for them? That way they can't influence others.

 

[MontyBrown]

Well, I admit I don't really give a shit how you voted, but you fit the profile pretty well on this subject matter.

People like you is why due process was invented. The proper kind, mind. Not this "we made it law to not have due process for these people so no due process is actually due process" shit.

I'm not ashamed of that.

This is literally the lowest of the low. You cry about due process, while I'll be glad we don't see any more bombings, mass vehicle attacks and stabbings - or more tension with the Muslim communities in our country.

The only people who lose are the pieces of shit who have ties to terrorism.

 

[CadetMahoney]

This is the important part.

What do we do with those who aren't dual nationals?

Yea, this is more about having their hands tied in dealing with British nationals (non-dual citizens) whom they have to accept back.

If you're British born or naturalized some time after as a British citizen (without dual-citizenship elsewhere) then they have to take you back because they can't make you stateless.

 

[andythinkpad]

Good. They can go fuck themselves.

How do you say go fuck yourself in Queen's English?

 

[Chainsawkitten]

Like I said earlier in the thread, if it can be proved beyond reasonable doubt someone joined a terrorist group willingly I don't see what's wrong with making them stateless, either that or increase sentences for joining those groups to life.

And yet you made fun of the Daily Mail mocking human rights... You realize the right to a nationality is protected by multiple UN resolutions, including the declaration of human rights? Most specifically, leaving someone stateless is prohibited by paragraph 1 och Article 8 of the Convention on the Reduction of Statelessness:

A Contracting State shall not deprive a person of its nationality if such deprivation would render him stateless.

Also, to people saying the UK can't leave people stateless, it absolutely can, according to The Immigration Act 2014. It's against international conventions on human rights, sure, but the UK has it in its law (although the power has not yet been used). I'm not sure what the UN could/would do if the UK were to use that power. Note that this is for naturalized citizens who do not have dual citizenship. If you are a citizen by birthright, it does not apply.

 

[Dadasch]

"one an Algerian national and the other a Nigerian citizen"
These two never had German citizenship.

And this part of the article is incorrect:


As in my last post, the Wissenschaftlicher Dienst des Bundestags makes it pretty clear that the law only applies to dual citizens joining a foreign army, not extremist groups.

Thanks, was doubting that as well. Glad it's no revoking of citizenships.

 

[Chittagong]

Sounds good to me.

I'd be fine with single citizens who go to fight for IS being stripped of their citizenship too, but unfortunately it doesn't seem possible to make people stateless. Absolutely no reason let traitors benefit of a nation they fight against.

 

[kruis]

These are people who failed in the Netherlands. It is our society that failed to fix the problem. Not the country of which he also has a citizenship of.

And look at my edit: It is possible for me to lose my citizenship even though I was born here.

So if we both do the same crime you can stay and I will end up in Morocco where I don't understand anything. That's not fair and not according to the values of our law system IMO.

If you were born in the Netherlands and you have both a Dutch and a Moroccan passport, the only way you could possibly lose your Dutch passport is if you were to become a convicted terrorist or if you were declared a ISIS soldier.

If that farfetched scenario is actually something that worries you, you should relinquish your Moroccan passport so you only have one nationality instead of two. Problem solved.

 

[CalamityPixel]

Give them all a life sentence and build a prison just for them? That way they can't influence others.

Prison is where extremism grows. Putting them all in one place and wasting millions is a bad idea.

 

[Koren]

Not really, it clearly states they are dual nationals and they can't revoke citizenship from those who aren't.

This won't apply to anyone who is born in the UK and only holds a British passport.

I thought in the UK, since 2014, there was somthing that allow to remove UK nationality to people that don't have dual nationality?

It heard it a lot some times ago when they were discussing the same thing in France (legally, France case isn't clear, 1954 convention hasn't been ratified, so there were a lot of talks with no real result)

 

[airborn]

What do we do with those who aren't dual nationals?

France has been hunting down and killing potential French jihadists in Syria and Iraq who could pose a threat if they return home.

 

[jakonovski]

I'm not ashamed of that.

This is literally the lowest of the low. You cry about due process, while I'll be glad we don't see any more bombings, mass vehicle attacks and stabbings - or more tension with the Muslim communities in our country.

The only people who lose are the pieces of shit who have ties to terrorism.

Hahahaha, yes, I'm sure this heralds a new era of peace and tranquility. As for the rest, you really are a peace of work.

 

[Nivash]

Not a fan of this. Once granted, all citisenships should be equal. Setting a precedent for different rules applying to natural born and naturalised citisens effectively establishes that there are first- and second-class citisens, with immigrants invariably ending up in the latter group. I don't like slippery-slope arguments, but I also can't help but wonder if this attitude could expand to other areas. We've already seen how quickly they want to throw EU citisens under the bus after Brexit.

 

[andythinkpad]

Not a fan of this. Once granted, all citisenships should be equal. Setting a precedent for different rules applying to natural born and naturalised citisens effectively establishes that there are first- and second-class citisens, with immigrants invariably ending up in the latter group. I don't like slippery-slope arguments, but I also can't help but wonder if this attitude could expand to other areas. We've already seen how quickly they want to throw EU citisens under the bus after Brexit.

Well UK should strip citizenship off the jihadists who only have UK citizenship too. It's only fair.

Saudi can take them for free. Saudi will need a lot of bodies in their impending civil war anyway.

 

[Nivash]

Well UK should strip citizenship off the jihadists who only have UK citizenship too. It's only fair.

Saudi can take them for free. Saudi will need a lot of bodies in their impending civil war anyway.

Considering that outlawing someone to the point of statelessness barely being a step above torture as a human rights violation; how about you don't do that either?

 

[Herr Schwarz]

Aslong as they are proven jihadists then sure. Aslong as they have evidence outside of "you woz in Syria!" Then sure.

 

[BrassDragon]

Dual nationalities is such a legal headache, particularly in the context of counter-espionage and counter-terrorism.

It's an ongoing issue for us in the Netherlands and I'll be curious to see how effective these UK measures will be long-term.

 

[Syriel]

Sounds like using ISIS to erode citizen rights.

The Netherlands also really loves not dealing with their own criminals and deporting people instead. Dual citizenship should in no way allow for this.

When my friend gets to keep his and live here but I lose mine for the same crime then that is discrimination plain and clear. I at that point am a 2nd class citizen afraid of being deported, even if I'm a native born citizen.

Dual citizenship is nothing more than declaring loyalties to two (or more countries).

It simultaneously offers more benefits (multiple passports make it easier to travel) and less benefits (dual loyalties mean you are under the jurisdiction of two countries).

Many countries don't even allow for dual nationality. You are either a citizen, or you are not. Others don't officially sanction it, but "look the other way."

Not a fan of this. Once granted, all citisenships should be equal. Setting a precedent for different rules applying to natural born and naturalised citisens effectively establishes that there are first- and second-class citisens, with immigrants invariably ending up in the latter group. I don't like slippery-slope arguments, but I also can't help but wonder if this attitude could expand to other areas. We've already seen how quickly they want to throw EU citisens under the bus after Brexit.

It is a distinction between those with one citizenship and those that claim multiple citizenships.

If you do carry multiple passports, there is nothing wrong with a country stripping one of those as they haven't made you stateless. The way to avoid that is to reject dual citizenship and only be a citizen of one country.

 

[Dadasch]

Considering that outlawing someone to the point of statelessness barely being a step above torture as a human rights violation; how about you don't do that either?

You have to understand. It's a good thing as long as it doesn't affect european Countries or NA.
Everybody else is just not as important.

 

[msv]

Dual citizenship is nothing more than declaring loyalties to two (or more countries).

It simultaneously offers more benefits (multiple passports make it easier to travel) and less benefits (dual loyalties mean you are under the jurisdiction of two countries).

Many countries don't even allow for dual nationality. You are either a citizen, or you are not. Others don't officially sanction it, but "look the other way."

Some countries don't allow you to revoke your citizenship. Morocco, for example.

In any case, citizenship has nothing to do with loyalty. It has to do with responsibility of the country. As a country you have a responsibility to and of your citizens.

Stripping citizenship is simply putting up your hands and saying 'not my responsibility'. It solves nothing and does no one any good. If you think what they did is wrong, then convict them and incarcerate them.

 

[Familienoberhauptvogel]

If you were born in the Netherlands and you have both a Dutch and a Moroccan passport, the only way you could possibly lose your Dutch passport is if you were to become a convicted terrorist or if you were declared a ISIS soldier.

If that farfetched scenario is actually something that worries you, you should relinquish your Moroccan passport so you only have one nationality instead of two. Problem solved.

I made the same mistake suggesting this when it's virtually impossible to relinquish Moroccan citizenship and they impose it upon several generations past expatriots.

 

[Nivash]

Dual citizenship is nothing more than declaring loyalties to two (or more countries).

It simultaneously offers more benefits (multiple passports make it easier to travel) and less benefits (dual loyalties mean you are under the jurisdiction of two countries).

Many countries don't even allow for dual nationality. You are either a citizen, or you are not. Others don't officially sanction it, but "look the other way."



It is a distinction between those with one citizenship and those that claim multiple citizenships.

If you do carry multiple passports, there is nothing wrong with a country stripping one of those as they haven't made you stateless. The way to avoid that is to reject dual citizenship and only be a citizen of one country.

Not a fan of that either, to be honest. I've always been of the opinion that demanding exclusive loyalty to one country stifles free movement. It should be possible for someone to immigrate and live permanently as an equal citisen in one country without demanding that they cut all ties to the country of their birth, for a lot of reasons. That's the very sentiment behind EU Citizenship as well.

I understand that there can be exceptions. It makes sense that a person that has a citizenship in two countries that are at total war be asked to pick a side, for instance, but that's not what's going on here. The UK isn't at war with the country of ISIS and these people have unrelated citizenships, the principle is just being used as an excuse to exile them. Then again, I also don't think that terrorism is concerning enough for there to be sweeping attacks on fundamental rights either, so that probably informs my view.

 

[Ishan]

I find the idea of a government being able to revoke citizenship incredibly disturbing.

If these people have broken laws, by all means prosecute them.

me too. Throw them in jail . The idea of revoked citizenships bothers me quite a bit. The fact its for dual citizens I guess makes it better.

 

[Syder]

And yet you made fun of the Daily Mail mocking human rights... You realize the right to a nationality is protected by multiple UN resolutions, including the declaration of human rights?

I mean, there's a huge difference between not torturing someone and not taking their passport away.

These people literally sign up to a death cult that advocates killing and raping innocent people. Excuse me if I don't cry because a jihadist lost his passport.

Also, I offered a fair alternative.

 

[shintoki]

I'm okay with this.

 

[Occam]

Good. As long as they don't become stateless, I see no problem with this. People who have dual citizenship and leave to join a murderous terrorist organization have made their choice. Other countries should do the same. Cuddling those who would kill you is not a sensible strategy.

 

[ginger ninja]

This is the important part.

What do we do with those who aren't dual nationals?

Take away their citizenship as well making them.. refugees

 

[IdreamofHIME]

You have to jump through quite a few hoops to claim dual citizenship, if you fuck up, then all those hoops should be closed.

 

[nelsonroyale]

If they are British born I don't agree with this. It is the UK's responsibility. If they aren't and they are out of the country with good grounds to suspect they are doing abhorrent things, then I think that could be fair. British born, though, I find that pretty racist.

Actually, I probably agree more with Ishan and Matt...Bring them to justice and try them if they are back in the country if they have committed a crime...I don't agree with revoking citizenship unless subject to specific grounds.

 

[TyrantII]

I find the idea of a government being able to revoke citizenship incredibly disturbing.

If these people have broken laws, by all means prosecute them.

THIS

There's something rotten about politicians stripping citizenship because it's the easy way out for them, instead of passing laws and prosecuting citizens that have broken those laws.

Not big on slippery slope arguments, but this won't stop there. There's something evil about a government by and for the people stripping citizenship from the people it claims to derive its legitimacy from.


As for the passport, that fair game and legal.

 

[Condom]

Dual citizenship is nothing more than declaring loyalties to two (or more countries).

It simultaneously offers more benefits (multiple passports make it easier to travel) and less benefits (dual loyalties mean you are under the jurisdiction of two countries).

Many countries don't even allow for dual nationality. You are either a citizen, or you are not. Others don't officially sanction it, but "look the other way.

Ok? I don't see your point here?

My parents both had Dutch citizenship when they had me in the Netherlands where I directly got my citizenship and have lived for decades (and plan on doing so for the foreseeable future).

I am of the believe that me having another citizenship does not mean that my from birth granted citizenship can be revoked. And again, oh yay they're doing this to terrorists only now but parties that want to go further have massive popularity here.

That means my rights will just be eroded further in the future and I'm not an idiot, I will protest now instead of when it's too late with Herr Wilders in power or one of his spinn offs.

 

[2MF]

I mean, there's a huge difference between not torturing someone and not taking their passport away.

These people literally sign up to a death cult that advocates killing and raping innocent people. Excuse me if I don't cry because a jihadist lost his passport.

Also, I offered a fair alternative.

I don't think anyone here is worried about what happens specifically to the ISIS guys. It's more about the principle and the slippery slope problem.

There are other examples of a measure starting out as anti-terrorism and then becoming much more broad (such as surveillance).

 

[Mysterious]

Wasn't this a big thing in Canada two years ago, and one of the reasons Justin Trudeau won was because he was against it?

 

[MisterFalcon]

Ok? I don't see your point here?

My parents both had Dutch citizenship when they had me in the Netherlands where I directly got my citizenship and have lived for decades (and plan on doing so for the foreseeable future).

I am of the believe that me having another citizenship does not mean that my from birth granted citizenship can be revoked. And again, oh yay they're doing this to terrorists only now but parties that want to go further have massive popularity here.

That means my rights will just be eroded further in the future and I'm not an idiot, I will protest now instead of when it's too late with Herr Wilders in power or one of his spinn offs.

I can't think of anything more likely to bring Wilders into power then a returning jihadi getting a light sentence due to a lack of evidence and then blowing himself up in a train.

 

[O Canada Our Home and Native Land]

I'm not comfortable with a government having this power over people that have citizenship from birth. Getting rid of people that joined ISIS is fine, but if it leads to more than it could be problematic.

 

[Syder]

I don't think anyone here is worried about what happens specifically to the ISIS guys. It's more about the principle and the slippery slope problem.

There are other examples of a measure starting out as anti-terrorism and then becoming much more broad (such as surveillance).

Okay, in principle, fuck terrorists.

In practice, make joining a terrorist organisation an instant life sentence.

 

[ClosingADoor]

Ok? I don't see your point here?

My parents both had Dutch citizenship when they had me in the Netherlands where I directly got my citizenship and have lived for decades (and plan on doing so for the foreseeable future).

I am of the believe that me having another citizenship does not mean that my from birth granted citizenship can be revoked. And again, oh yay they're doing this to terrorists only now but parties that want to go further have massive popularity here.

That means my rights will just be eroded further in the future and I'm not an idiot, I will protest now instead of when it's too late with Herr Wilders in power or one of his spinn offs.

But this is the difference, isn't it? You plan to keep living here. And you can. Nobody is going to take that away. But when you decide you rather join an enemy force, then that is the choice you made.

We are not talking about someone making a stupid decision, doing a bit of crime and regretting it or whatever. We are talking about people who do not accept the country they are a citizen of. So yes, if the option is there, that can be taken away from them, and that is something they apparently want also, otherwise they wouldn't have joined a terrorist organisation and started fighting in another country. They are joining an enemy force.

 

[Rktk]

I guess they're someone elses problem therefore problem solved.

 

[2MF]

Okay, in principle, fuck terrorists.

In practice, make joining a terrorist organisation an instant life sentence.

Edit: misread

 

[TyrantII]

I can't think of anything more likely to bring Wilders into power then a returning jihadi getting a light sentence due to a lack of evidence and then blowing himself up in a train.

Yes, authoritarians use fear to gain power and subvert Democracies.

And it's in the hand of the people to be smarter and stop it.

 

[AcademicSaucer]

Okay, in principle, fuck terrorists.

In practice, make joining a terrorist organisation an instant life sentence.

I dont think this is automatic tho.

 

[jakonovski]

Was this practice ever used during the Troubles, btw?

 

[Dongs Macabre]

.

 

[Shiggy]

Was this practice ever used during the Troubles, btw?

Did people in Northern Ireland have both Irish and UK citizenship at that time?

 

[CadetMahoney]

Theresa May's next step is revoking citizenship to people who where naturalized (i.e. had citizenship to another country before becoming British citizens and only having a British passport), after all they won't be made stateless, they just go back to the previous country. I believe this was mentioned before or maybe I am confusing it with something else.

 

[openrob]

I find the idea of a government being able to revoke citizenship incredibly disturbing.

If these people have broken laws, by all means prosecute them.

This