The European Court of Human Rights has formally requested the United Kingdom government to provide legal justification for its controversial 2019 decision to revoke the citizenship of Shamima Begum, who traveled to Syria as a teenager to join Islamic State. In a significant development, the Strasbourg-based court has presented the British authorities with detailed inquiries regarding potential violations of anti-trafficking obligations under Article 4 of the European Convention on Human Rights.
The case centers on whether former Home Secretary Sajid Javid’s decision to strip Begum of her British citizenship on national security grounds complied with international human rights standards. The government had argued that the revocation was ‘conducive to the public good’ and that Begum qualified for Bangladeshi citizenship through parental heritage—a claim contested by Bangladesh itself.
Begum’s legal representatives from Birnberg Peirce Solicitors contend that UK authorities failed to consider critical factors before revoking her citizenship, including whether she was a victim of trafficking, whether British institutions failed in their protective duties, and whether citizenship removal would obstruct future trafficking investigations. They argue that as a 15-year-old, Begum was ‘lured, encouraged, and deceived for purposes of sexual exploitation’ to IS-controlled territory.
The legal team emphasizes that British authorities had prior knowledge of trafficking risks, citing that a close friend had previously disappeared via identical routes, yet police failed to implement adequate safeguarding measures or warn families. The ECHR’s intervention occurs amid growing concerns about the UK’s expanded use of citizenship-stripping powers and follows previous judicial findings that Begum faces ‘inhuman and degrading treatment’ in her Syrian detention camp.
While the UK Home Office declined to comment, the case represents a pivotal examination of counter-terrorism measures versus human rights protections. A final judgment is anticipated after both parties submit their comprehensive legal arguments to the European court.