What a shocking decision

[LeningradCowboy]

Which bit of British law allows citizenship to be revoked then?

I want them punished by the full extent of the law and they are. I’m not defending them I’m defending the law. No one in here is defending peadophiles they are just saying you can’t just revoke the citizenship of someone and just deport them, otherwise why not just deport every criminal?

What the **** has roe vs wade and the American Supreme Court got to do with this? what a reach ffs

Section 40 of the British Nationality Act 1981.

[JamesWales]

Which bit of British law allows citizenship to be revoked then?

I want them punished by the full extent of the law and they are. I’m not defending them I’m defending the law. No one in here is defending peadophiles they are just saying you can’t just revoke the citizenship of someone and just deport them, otherwise why not just deport every criminal?

What the **** has roe vs wade and the American Supreme Court got to do with this? what a reach ffs

I mention Roe v Wade, as an example of how the law is complex but also moral.

It absolutely is within the law to overturn Roe v Wade but you weren't on that thread telling people upset about it that "you understand the law and they dont" I mention it not to compare the two, but to highlight the inconsistency in your response

And yes, of course, I fully understand that you don't endorse what they did. That goes without saying

[rudy gestede]

I don’t post in every thread I don’t see how that’s relevant at all ffs. I don’t really post in any thread because it’s always so obvious how certain people react.

In a moral world these guys would be locked up forever but there’s a very good reason why that doesn’t happen. We can’t just deport them because we’d like it.

[Canton Kev]

These are awful crimes but so are those involving extreme violence such as armed robbery

But these fellas find God, turn over a new leaf and write a book or teach other prisoners to read etc

And out they come .....oh he's got a good heart , he's loves his mum

Wtf is all that about

The cashier that he held a sawn off to during the Bank job is still under the care of her psychiatrist for trauma !

What’s your point? Every crime should be punished with life in prison?

[Eric the Half a Bee]

Usual suspects turning out.

Some of us will get angry about the head of a paedophile grooming gang receiving hundreds of thousands of taxpayers money to fight deportation on technicalities, having got away with his crimes for years.

You guys can find a tweet somewhere or something.

Deal?

For the record I would happily deport anyone of dual nationality (or more) who commits crimes such as happened here. I can understand the emotions people feel about this. It also needs to be understood that this is UK law deciding on UK citizens, whether we like it or not. It is not, in any way, siding with the criminals or anything else. It is about UK law only.

At present the UK government can revoke UK citizenship to anyone seen as a threat to national safety and security, and those who have obtained UK citizenship fraudulently. The UK government has to be satisfied the person concerned will be able to get citizenship elsewhere as, under international law, everyone has the right to a nationality and no-one shall be deprived of his nationality. Nobody should become stateless.

[jon1959]

Section 40 of the British Nationality Act 1981.

Just looked at the wording of that (again). The Home Sectretary can take away someone's British nationality in certain circumstances, but cannot make them stateless as a result - which was one reason for the furore in the Shamima Begum case.

In this case my understanding from the Tribunal reports is that it is about alleged inconsistency of treatment and whether the gang members would be able to re-claim Pakistani citizenship or not.

As an aside - the thread title talks about 'a shocking decision'. The Tribunal hasn't made a decision yet has it?

[Pedro de la Rosa]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-englan...ester-61957132

No sense in the decision not to deport all of them.

Human Rights, my a**e, what about the Human Rights of their victims.

Were they born here? If so, I don't see why they're Pakistan's problem

[HiVis]

They also have Pakistani citizenship, apart from the ring leader who renounced his so he wouldn’t be deported. Bring back Penal colonies for these perverts, they have relinquished their rights to being released into the world.

Isnt rehabilitation back into society the purpose of prison ?

[HiVis]

I'm not surprised it doesn't rile you. Still, at least you can start a thread on Boris jogging into a hotel, eh?

It's completely wrong that we cannot deport people like this, and spend huge sums on supporting them.

The mark of a civilised society is how it treats its criminals.

[William Treseder]

Or to make sure the law is enforced as it’s written?

I have no sympathy for these scumbags and would have no problem with anything happening to them but it’s mad how much people want the laws to be completely ignored with “certain” criminals.

Always very revealing.

What does it reveal?

[HiVis]

Usual suspects turning out.

Some of us will get angry about the head of a paedophile grooming gang receiving hundreds of thousands of taxpayers money to fight deportation on technicalities, having got away with his crimes for years.

You guys can find a tweet somewhere or something.

Deal?

You'll no doubt be aware that the cornerstone of our legal system is the individual can do whatever they want without consequence, unless there is a law against it.

Conversely, the government and all of its agencies can only act within the law, and cannot act outside of the powers given to it by law.

If they get off on a technicality, surely it's better to let 10 guilty men go free than punish one innocent man.

Our legal system ain't perfect, but its as good a system an there is.

[William Treseder]

The mark of a civilised society is how it treats its criminals.

The mark of a soft centred society is how it treats it’s victims.

[HiVis]

Absolute nonsense - Thats what you guys use when you can't win an argument. Claim xenophobia. This is a guy with dual citizenship and should be deported. If he doesn't want his British citizenship removed, then he shouldn't groom and rape children.

And yes, I am well aware that the law is being used to keep him here and at what cost that brings, and we are all aware who supports that. The law is complex works in many ways - not all decisions are morally right, or else you would be on the Roe v Wade discussion forum smugly telling everyone "some of us understand how the law works". But you aren't, you are here telling that to people who want someone deported who has caused utter misery and ruined the lives of hundreds of vulnerable girls.

You'll no doubt be aware that a state cannot remove citizenship under international law.

Should we just ignore the laws we don't like?

[HiVis]

Section 40 of the British Nationality Act 1981.

Wasn't that superceded by the 2009 act?

[HiVis]

The mark of a soft centred society is how it treats it’s victims.

We arent discussing the victims. And I agree, the victims should be central to any discussion

[William Treseder]

We arent discussing the victims. And I agree, the victims should be central to any discussion

The victims never get discussed.

[North Cardiff Blue]

they did their crimes here, they should be punished here to the full extent of the law.
They have UK citizenship and no Pakistan citizenship currently - why would Pakistan want a bunch of paedos being sent there, this isn't the 1700 we don't have penal colonies any more

Bring back hanging for them

[Tuerto]

Just for them?

[Pedro de la Rosa]

The victims never get discussed.

For good reason

[SLUDGE FACTORY]

What’s your point? Every crime should be punished with life in prison?

No the point is that us brits get all foamey mouthed and hostile about child abuse yet equally shocking and damaging crime ? ....ah well he's done his time , rehabilitate him etc etc

[Elwood Blues]

Which bit of British law allows citizenship to be revoked then?

I want them punished by the full extent of the law and they are. I’m not defending them I’m defending the law. No one in here is defending peadophiles they are just saying you can’t just revoke the citizenship of someone and just deport them, otherwise why not just deport every criminal?

What the **** has roe vs wade and the American Supreme Court got to do with this? what a reach ffs

I though you knew the law.......

The Home Office has the power to deprive someone (of British Citizenship) under Section 40 of the British Nationality Act 1981 on the grounds of:

Fraud
False representations or concealment of a material fact
Because it is conducive to the public good

The Home Office can deprive British Citizenship if it would be conducive to public good. It will be in the public interest because the Applicant may be involved with:

Terrorism
Espionage
Serious organised crime
War crimes
Or unacceptable behaviours

The Home Office cannot deprive someone under the Conducive to Public Good test if it means that the person will become Stateless.

(Sorry Leningradcowboy I missed your post before I wrote this, should have replied to yours)

[+ the native hipster]

The mark of a civilised society is how it treats its criminals.

imagine a white mass rapist of school girls being released into a white working class area, not sure they would be over tolerant.

[Elwood Blues]

Wasn't that superceded by the 2009 act?

I got my information from the site of a firm of solicitors who deal with deportation issues which still refers to the 1981 act so I would guess not

[Elwood Blues]

You'll no doubt be aware that a state cannot remove citizenship under international law.

Should we just ignore the laws we don't like?

Shouldn't your first line read that it cannot remove citizenship if it leaves them stateless?

[Eric Cartman]

Unless I am reading this wrong, it does seem a bit of a loophole that you can renounce your secondary citizenship to avoid deportation.