From a current case, taking away a person of his citizenship was lately defined as illegal in reply to the UK government trying to take away two Islamists of their British Citizenship, as a reason to combat radicalism in the United Kingdom.
Nevertheless, in spite of this effort, those in question plead against the UK authority, in which flagged the mean to a new legal practice within United Kingdom law.
One of the main logic behind the denial of the judges to withdrawing the individuals in question of their British citizenship is that by doing so, this would leave both of them ‘stateless’, which eventually infringes international law.
A precise setback spotted with the effort to disposes the individuals of their nationality is that it seems that the Home Office has an addiction to hang around until the entities have departed the UK before trying to withdraw their citizenship, as if this technique will make it simpler to do so. It is also obvious that those accused of terror groups usually appear to be of dual-nationality also.
On the other hand, in reply, the government claimed that the authority to cancel citizenship was really “particularly important” in respect to the prevention of violence in the United Kingdom, especially given the upsurge of migrants from Syria and Iraq who now live in the UK under dual-citizenship.
Additionally, while it is a violation against international law to constrain an individual ‘stateless’, alternatively within the Immigration Act 2014 there is a new authority in which can grant this if the individual in question has appeared in a way that has “acted in a way extremely harmful to the fundamental well being of the UK”
The Home Office has specified that they plan to plea the recent ruling concerning the declination of the authority to cancel citizenship from the latest event, nevertheless until then the practice continues.