Hayat Tahrir al Sham (HTS) went from a jihadist movement once aligned to al Qaeda to forming the official government of Syria.
It was a monumental transformation for them, their country and the wider Middle East.
But potentially too for British people who went to Syria – and who were stripped of their citizenship as a result, on the grounds of national security.
Tauqir Sharif, better known as Tox, went to Syria in 2012 as an aid worker. He was accused of being part of a group affiliated with al Qaeda, which he denies, and the then-home secretary Amber Rudd deprived him of his British citizenship in 2017.
«As of now, I am deprived of my UK citizenship but I’m not a convicted terrorist – and the reason for that is because we refused, we boycotted, the SIAC [Special Immigration Appeals Commission] secret courts, which don’t allow you to see any of the evidence presented against you,» he said.
«And one of the things that I always called for was, look, put me in front of a jury, let’s have an open hearing.»
HTS is still a proscribed terrorist organisation but the British government has now established relations with it.
Foreign Secretary David Lammy travelled to Damascus to meet the jihadist-turned-Syrian interim president – the man who swapped his nom de guerre of al Jolani for Ahmed al Sharaa.
David Lammy shakes hands with Ahmed al Sharaa in Damascus. Pic: X / @DavidLammy
If the UK government takes HTS off the terror list, what does that mean for those who lost their citizenship after being accused of being part of it?
People who joined HTS are only a subset among the scores of people who have had their citizenship revoked – a tool the UK government has been quick to use.
According to a report by the Parliamentary Joint Human Rights Committee, the UK «uses deprivation of citizenship orders more than almost any country in the world».
The peak of that was in 2017, and mainly in relation to Syria – especially in the case of people joining Islamic State, perhaps most famously Shamima Begum.
Shamima Begum was stripped of her British citizenship on national security grounds
And because people cannot be made entirely stateless, and need to have a second nationality, or be potentially eligible for one, there are worries of racism in who the orders apply to.
Countries like Pakistan and Bangladesh offer dual nationality, whereas other nations do not. In 2022, the Institute of Race Relations said «the vast majority of those deprived are Muslim men with South Asian or Middle Eastern/North African heritage».
Legal grey areas
Sky News submitted Freedom of Information requests to the Home Office asking for a breakdown of second nationalities of those deprived of citizenship, but was refused twice on national security grounds.
The independent reviewer of terrorism legislation, Jonathan Hall KC, told Sky News there are issues around transparency.
«I do think there is a problem when you have people whose relationship with the country that they’re left with is really technical and they may never have realised that they had that citizenship before and may never gone to that country,» he said.
«Me and my predecessors have all said, owing to how frequently this power is used, it should be something that the independent reviewer should have the power to review. «I asked, my predecessor asked, we’ve both been told no, so I agree there’s a lack of transparency.»
Read more from Sky News:
Menendez brothers denied parole – but they could still taste freedom
What Epstein’s right-hand woman said about Trump and Prince Andrew
UK set to bask in 30C sunshine over bank holiday weekend
No automatic reversal
Even if the government does remove HTS from the terror list, it would not automatically invalidate decisions to deprive people of their citizenship.
Macer Gifford gave up a career as a banker in London to join the Kurdish People’s Protection Units (YPG) as a foreign volunteer between 2015 and 2017.
He told Sky News that decisions «made years ago in the interest of the British public have to remain».
«We can’t sort of go through previous cases nitpicking through it, wasting time and money to bring it up to date,» he added. «We can’t be naive because the intent to go out, the decision to go in itself is a huge decision for them. So it shows commitment when they’re there, they then, if they take an active participation in the organizations that they’ve been accused of joining, again, that involves training and perseverance and dedication to the cause.»
But those born and raised in Britain, who joined the same cause, and lost their citizenship as a result, might reasonably ask why that should remain the case.» He refuted allegations of being a part of an al Qaeda-affiliated group, yet his British citizenship was revoked by then-home secretary Amber Rudd in 2017. Despite being stripped of his UK citizenship, he maintains his innocence, citing the lack of transparency in the Special Immigration Appeals Commission (SIAC) secret courts where evidence against him was presented. He expressed a desire for an open hearing in front of a jury to address the accusations.
Currently, Hay’at Tahrir al-Sham (HTS) remains a designated terrorist organization, but the UK government has initiated diplomatic relations with them. Foreign Secretary David Lammy visited Damascus to meet the former jihadist now serving as the Syrian interim president, Ahmed al Sharaa. The potential delisting of HTS as a terrorist group raises questions about the status of individuals who lost their citizenship due to alleged ties with the organization.
The practice of revoking citizenship has been extensively utilized by the UK government, particularly concerning individuals associated with Syria, such as those who joined the Islamic State like Shamima Begum. Concerns have been raised about the discriminatory implications of these orders, as individuals need a second nationality or eligibility for one to avoid statelessness. Reports indicate that the majority of those deprived of citizenship are Muslim men with South Asian or Middle Eastern/North African backgrounds.
The lack of transparency surrounding the process of revoking citizenship and the potential for individuals to be left with only technical ties to a country they may have never visited have raised legal concerns. Requests for information on the second nationalities of those affected were denied on national security grounds. The independent reviewer of terrorism legislation highlighted issues of transparency and suggested that the power to review such cases should be granted to an independent body. My predecessor and I both inquired about the situation, only to be met with a resounding «no.» This lack of transparency is concerning, and I agree with this assessment. The government’s decision to remove HTS from the terror list does not automatically reverse the deprivation of citizenship for those affected.
Macer Gifford made a significant sacrifice by leaving his banking career in London to join the Kurdish People’s Protection Units (YPG) as a foreign volunteer. He emphasized the importance of decisions made in the past for the benefit of the British public to stand. He believes that revisiting past cases would be a waste of time and resources, as individuals who made the decision to join such organizations displayed commitment, training, and dedication to their cause.
However, the question remains for those born and raised in Britain who joined similar causes and lost their citizenship – why should their status remain unchanged? This issue raises concerns about fairness and equity in the decisions made regarding citizenship deprivation.
The transformation of HTS from a jihadist movement aligned with al Qaeda to the official government of Syria has had far-reaching implications for both the country and the wider Middle East. This shift has also impacted British individuals who traveled to Syria and subsequently had their citizenship revoked on national security grounds.
Tauqir Sharif, also known as Tox, traveled to Syria in 2012 as an aid worker. His experience highlights the complexities surrounding the decisions made by individuals to travel to conflict zones and engage in humanitarian efforts. The implications of these decisions can have long-lasting effects on individuals’ citizenship status and rights.
The challenges faced by individuals like Macer Gifford and Tox underscore the need for a more transparent and equitable approach to addressing issues of citizenship deprivation. The decisions made in these cases have far-reaching consequences and raise important questions about the rights and responsibilities of individuals involved in conflicts abroad.
In conclusion, the lack of transparency surrounding citizenship deprivation cases involving individuals who traveled to conflict zones like Syria highlights the need for a more comprehensive and fair approach to addressing these issues. The decisions made in these cases have significant implications for the individuals involved and raise important questions about accountability and justice. It is essential to consider the complexities of these situations and ensure that the rights and responsibilities of all parties are upheld in a transparent and equitable manner. He denies being part of a group affiliated with al Qaeda, but the then-home secretary Amber Rudd stripped him of his British citizenship in 2017. Despite being deprived of his UK citizenship, he maintains that he is not a convicted terrorist due to boycotting the SIAC secret courts. He has expressed a desire for an open hearing in front of a jury.
The UK government has established relations with HTS, a proscribed terrorist organization, raising questions about individuals who lost their citizenship after being associated with it. Deprivation of citizenship orders, a tool frequently used by the UK government, peaked in 2017 primarily concerning Syria and individuals joining groups like Islamic State.
Concerns have been raised about potential racism in the application of these orders, as most individuals deprived of citizenship are Muslim men with South Asian or Middle Eastern/North African heritage. The need for individuals to have a second nationality or be eligible for one to prevent statelessness has also been highlighted.
Legal grey areas surround the deprivation of citizenship, with transparency issues and questions about individuals’ awareness of their second nationality. The independent reviewer of terrorism legislation has emphasized the need for greater oversight of the use of this power.
SOURCE
