Do we now have different levels of citizenship?

Do you have links to examples of people who’ve been through this foxie48?

www.thenationalnews.com/world/uk-news/2022/01/17/british-man-wins-back-citizenship-revoked-by-home-office-after-five-year-fight/
ttps://www.middleeasteye.net/news/uk-man-unlawfully-stripped-citizenship-reunited-family-after-4-years
I came across the case of two Bangladeshi brothers, who are now back in the UK after having been stripped of their citizenship but who have never been charged of any offence but I can't find it now. However, my point is if another UK citizen (without the possibility of dual citizenship) is charged and found guilty of membership of a proscribed organisation they would serve the sentence in a British prison with the opportunity to be start a new life once the sentence had been served, this is not equitable treatment.

I better behave myself 😲 as I am one of those who was born in the UK to European parents.
Was thinking both Rishi Sunak and possibly Suella Braverman call into this category!!

Fall not call

Nope, they are OK as India (Sunak) and Kenya (Braverman) do not allow dual Nationality and (Braverman) Mauritius has a more complicated system but it looks unlikely! However, anyone of Somali descent could be treated like this. there are lots of countries that allow dual nationality with the UK and vice versa but generally you have to apply for it, not just be ascribed it by a country that wants to take away your UK citizenship.

OH was born abroad to parents who were born abroad. He arrived in 1948, his family fleeing apartheid to stay together. A toddler at the time. He found out by chance, aged 25, that he was not British! Went to register our marriage and it was taking ages. When he went to enquire why, he was told 'we are so sorry Dr, but we can't do that as you are not British'. Thank goodness he found out then, and it was all sorted in weeks.

But ever since the Windrush scandal, with people who also started to arrive the same year (1948) we think that it could have been him- finding himself in limbo at a much later age.

The shock was massive!

There also used to be a two-tier Britishness. If you were born in the colonies, like I was, you were a British subject. Born in Britain, you were automatically a British citizen. The latter was what one needs/needed for permanent residence and rights.
In my case, I was able to take citizenship by the lucky chance that my father happened to be born in Fulham, just before WWI, when my grandfather was training as a doctor!

That happened to my sister in law, Fleurpepper. She came to the UK as a toddler and it was only when she applied for a full passport (you used to be able to get £1? ones) that she was told she wasn’t British! She had to then fulfill the same requirements as anyone else coming to the UK at the time, ie remain in the UK for five years. Not that she could leave the UK as she had no passport!

My dad was born in South Africa , coming to the UK as a child. When he applied for his State Pension they at first refused to pay it because he didn’t have proof of his birth - SA didn’t have birth registration birth until after the era my dad was born in - or nationality. He was most indignant and memorably told the officials ‘You won’t pay my pension but you didn’t have any problem calling me up to fight in 1939, did you?’ They paid up.

I think there have been UK/US citizens who have had their UK citizenship revoked.

I have no objection to this in principle but I think the decision should not just be in the hands of the Secretary of State. The ought to be a court case where the evidence is aired in open court and there is an appeal system, again carrie out in open court so all can see what is happening.

You can’t air certain evidence in open court MOnica - as with the Begum case.

I accept that some evidence may need to be presented in camera. But essentially if someone is going to have their citizenship withdrawn as much as the evidence as possible should be heard in public as should their defence.

It is the same as in the family courts, where again, sensitive evidence will need to be held in camera but it is known their have been miscarriages of justice and that families have been banned from seeking redress.

If you don’t hear all the evidence you can’t have an informed view of the fairness of the decision - and the most damning evidence, affecting national security, will always be heard in camera. Hence the long thread about the Begum case, because people didn’t have, and for very good reasons couldn’t be given, the full picture. Decisions to revoke citizenship aren’t taken on a whim, they are taken for serious reasons.

My concern though in this thread is that some people are treated differently because of their ethnicity. If someone who's parents and grandparents were all born in the UK came to the notice of the secret service and it was decided they were a danger to the British public, they could not have their citizenship revoked. They could come back to the UK if they were abroad and if there was evidence of the offences, they would be charged and face trial. TBH I'm less concerned about evidence being heard in camera if that is the only way to do it, it's treating UK citizens differently that is the issue, it smacks of racism. Other countries are not doing this (as far as I am aware).

foxie48 Many people in this country of various ethnicities are 2nd, 3rd and 4th generation residents. They are British citizens through and through and through.

I have seen reports of other countries acting similalry, although no specific case comes immediately to mind. Many countries do not allow dual citizenship, so the person would be left stateless if their British citizenship was withdrawn and I think that is not permissable.

These rules would apply to someone with US/British citizen ship. It is just that at present one of the key terrorist threats to this country comes from Islamic extremism. Most of Islamic terrorists, few though they be, come from the Middle East, North Aftica and Asia.

I seem to remember that when The Troubles were at their height, most of the terrorists were Irish, I think the nationality rules for irish/ British are different, but if they had been the same, would you have considered taking British citizenship away from from dual irish/British was racist?

Extreme right-wing terrorist sentenced to 23 years
www.avonandsomerset.police.uk ›

Extreme Right-Wing Terror Group Convicted of Terrorism ...
www.counterterrorism.police.uk › extreme-right-
There's enough right wing terrorists around in the UK but they just don't seem to get noticed as much. I did a Prevent course a couple of years ago and certainly the police and SS are aware of the rise of these pernicious people. However, to answer your question the present govt has included new clauses to the Nationality and Borders Act and during the "Troubles" the Secretary of State didn't have the powers he has now to remove citizenship and as far as I know, not one white person has had their British citizenship removed since these extra powers were introduced. Please share if you can find one.

It’s nothing to do with colour of skin. Citizenship can be removed if the person also has citizenship of another country, regardless of ethnicity.

Most rightwing terrorist are home bred. If one form of terrorism is particular associated, but not ,exclusively with a certain ethnic group. It is not racism if the majority of people charged and convicted belong to the ethnic group where the terrorism resides. And if the convicted terrorist is of dual nationality, their British citizenship is removed.

Rightwing terrorism is also associated with a specific ethnic group. the majority white population who, almost without exception hold British citizenship only. I am sure that if any of them were of dual citizenship their british citizenship would be removed.

Racism is ever present still in the Uk, but let us not see it where it does not exist.

I note that Mark Gordon, despite having lived in the US since a very young age, was returned to the UK after serving his prison sentence for rape because he had British citizenship.

He was deported. I'm sorry but I don't follow your argument. He was born in the UK (Birmingham) so was a British citizen> and having served his sentence he was deported.... It's what most countries do...what other countries don't do is leave their problem people to other countries by taking away their citizenship because they have a "vague technical" dual nationality. Let's agree that we see things differently. I am very comfortable with how I see things and if they are different to you, well that's OK.