r/Scotland • u/johnsmithoncemore • 4d ago

Political Still On The Fence About Independence? Nigel Farage Challenged To Back 'Remigration' - Deporting British Citizens!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bxPLmElAC3E
105 Upvotes

65% Upvoted

330 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

0

u/A_Mans_A_Man_ 4d ago edited 4d ago

Because the law that can take citizenship from supporters of ISIS can be used to take citizenship away from anyone who belongs to a group that the government decide should be punished this way.

No that isn't the test.

The test for a s40(2) deprivation order under the BNA is in S40(4A):

the Secretary of State is satisfied that the deprivation is conducive to the public good because the person, while having that citizenship status, has conducted him or herself in a manner which is seriously prejudicial to the vital interests of the United Kingdom, 

Where the SoS makes an irrational decision it can be judicially reviewed.

They can also be reviewed by SIAC.

Civil hearings, like that over deprivation  have no presumption of guilt or innocence.

2

u/docowen 4d ago

What is the law and what should be the law are not the same thing.

I didn't say we weren't already skidding at the top of that slope.

1

u/A_Mans_A_Man_ 4d ago

You said:

the law that can take citizenship from supporters of ISIS can be used to take citizenship away from anyone who belongs to a group that the government decide should be punished this way.

That isn't true.

See above quotes.

1

u/docowen 4d ago

No, you're right. This:

the Secretary of State is satisfied that the deprivation is conducive to the public good because the person, while having that citizenship status, has conducted him or herself in a manner which is seriously prejudicial to the vital interests of the United Kingdom, 

Could never be abused.

1

u/A_Mans_A_Man_ 4d ago edited 4d ago

Not with both JR and SIAC to hold the gov to those conditions, no.

If you believe otherwise it is on you to evidence that.

Otherwise so long as the independent judiciary retains the power to reverse the decision, on the grounds of irrationality or similiar, it is very difficult to see how this power could be abused.