She may have explicitly renounced her citizenship, and certainly renounced it implicitly, when she joined an entity that is at war with Denmark and other Western states, but who cares? Celebrate diversity! What could possibly go wrong?
“The Supreme Court: It is illegal to deprive an IS woman of her citizenship,” translated from “Højesteret: Ulovligt at fratage IS-kvindes statsborgerskab,” Ekstra Bladet, March 22, 2023 (thanks to L.):
It was invalid when, in 2020, the Ministry of Immigration and Integration revoked the Danish citizenship of a woman who years ago had traveled to Syria to join the Islamic State.
The Supreme Court decided that on Wednesday.
The decision is because, according to the Supreme Court, the ministry’s decision was not in accordance with the requirement of proportionality.
The Ministry of Immigration and Integration can only remove Danish citizenship if it does not make the person stateless.
The woman was born in Denmark and was given both Danish and Iranian citizenship at birth by virtue of her father.
But, according to the Supreme Court, she has “neither had a residence in Iran nor otherwise stayed in Iran for a long time, nor has contact with relatives in Iran, just as she does not speak Farsi, which is Iran’s official language.”
“The Supreme Court then determined that A (the woman, ed.) only has a very weak connection to Iran,” writes the Supreme Court.
It was in 2015 that the woman, aged 20, traveled to Syria to join the self-proclaimed caliphate, Islamic State.
She married in Syria a man who was a member of the organization. They had children together.
She stayed in an area controlled by the Islamic State until she was captured in March 2019.
Since then she has stayed with her children in the al-Hol camp and later in the al-Roj camp.
The woman has not denied having joined the Islamic State, and that on that basis she could well be deprived of her Danish citizenship.
On the other hand, she argued that it was contrary to the principle of proportionality.
Earlier this week, the Ministry of Immigration and Integration was acquitted by Copenhagen City Court in a similar case.
In that case, two twin sisters had been stripped of their Danish citizenship.
According to TV 2, the women were born in Denmark to Somali refugees, but grew up in England and do not speak Danish.
According to the media, they went together to the Islamic State in Syria as 16-year-olds in 2014.
tim gallagher says
A huge mistake. Western countries are just too soft in all ways, including their legal systems. It is a nice way to be but not when you are dealing with scum like these ISIS creatures, who are sadistic, evil people. I keep hearing this, out here in australia, that you can’t leave people stateless and so our government recently brought some ISIS brides and their offspring back to Australia. I think it is a big blunder. These evil scum need to be left to rot away where they currently are.
John Smith says
Your’e absolutely spot on Tim, we are far to soft. The trouble is we have been brought up to believe that our ancestors were evil slave traders and that we white people are the most evil people on the planet. This is the universal conception towards us but nothing can be further from the truth. Until we start standing up for ourselves and showing the world what valuable contributions we have made towards it, our decline will continue.
tim gallagher says
That’s a large part of the problem, John. There are definitely too many people in our western societies who do buy that garbage about how horrible we have been. I don’t buy it for a moment and am a person who, like Wellington and many other people who comment here at Jihad Watch, can see the great aspects of western civilisation. As for these ISIS brides, it was no secret whatsoever what ISIS were up to, so I have no sympathy for them. The argument that I do keep hearing seems to be that, if they are Australian citizens, we are stuck with them. I don’t know whether that is strictly true legally, but it seems to be why the government here are bringing them back. No doubt a fortune in taxpayers’ money will be spent keeping an eye on them. It is interesting, John, because I just heard an expert on our education system here in Australia saying how it tends to teach students how terrible the white settlers out here were, poisoning the children’s minds in the way you say.
John Bovenmyer says
If they can’t take away her Danish citizenship, they charge and convict her of treason against it. In absentia if necessary. She can return to a Danish prison or accept another state’s citizenship, thus allowed removal of the Danish one.
࿗Infidel࿘ says
Precisely! Too bad they’ve ended the death penalty
gravenimage says
Denmark: Supreme Court rules that it’s illegal to deprive an Islamic State Muslima of her citizenship
………………………………..
She gave up her Danish citizenship when she joined the Islamic State.
This would not be so harmful if they allowed her to retain her Danish citizenship, then prosecuted her for her actions in the Islamic State, but that is obviously *not* the case here.
libertyORdeath says
If you’re anything but white and European you can do no wrong in their eyes. And even if you do, it’ll be chalked up to “Islamophobia”, “systemic racism”, or “mental illness.”
How can we ever return to common sense governance if we can’t even get something as simple as this right?
She was never a real citizen of Denmark.
She renounced her fake “citizenship” and joined the most ruthless terrorist group in the 21st century.
She wouldn’t want to come back if ISIS was successful…she’d still be cheering on the decapitation of the kaffirs. I’m quite sure of that.
And even with all that said, they just can’t act rationally due to their self-hate for the supposed sins of their ancestors. It’s quite funny actually when it’s about muslims – one of the only cultures to actually outperform the West in the slave trade, de jure racism, and colonialism.
libertyORdeath says
Is there ANYTHING a poor muslim could do that would make them lose their already fraudulent “citizenship” in the continent of Eurabia?
Doesn’t seem like it.
Dhimmi subjugation is so depressing.
They’ll refuse to let people like Mr. Spencer visit their countries, but if you’re a LITERAL TERRORIST they just can’t quit you.
History will not be kind to these spineless losers. Is there anything more depressing than ignorant submission? I can’t think of any. Nothing seems worse to me than knowing without a doubt that most of our problems could be solved in short order just by returning to the culture and laws that made the West great.
Trouble with muslims or terrorism?
Don’t let them in and deport those already there.
Minority crime got ya down?
How about enforcing the laws equally regardless of race, religion or political affiliation.
Don’t like groomer teachers sexualizing your kids?
Enforce the child abuse laws that are already on the books. It’s already illegal for an adult to discuss sex or show porn to kids. We just have to enforce it.
Tired of China/Soviet style censorship?
Return to the inherent rights of ALL citizens to freely express themselves without fear of persecution.
Sick of self-serving climate alarmism?
Ignore the indoctrinated cult members and do what is best for human prosperity.
Sick of seeing hundreds of thousands of Americans poisoned by Chinese fentynal via the Mexican cartels?
Shut down the border until the cartels are destroyed. Mexico MIGHT actually clean up the massive corruption and dethrone the cartels currently running the country IF they lose BILLIONS in trade with their biggest trade partner.
Tired of the CCP stealing ALL of our intellectual property and technology?
Stop letting MILLIONS of CCP sponsored “students” into our universities, shut down the CCP sponsored Confucius Institutes and Thousan talents program and revoke China’s “most favored nation” status. Stop letting Chinese money influence our politics. Oh, and maybe prosecute the American General who committed TREASON by ignoring his commander-in-chief and giving intel to the PLA.
Seems like a good start to me.
Kepha says
It seems that Denmark also has a strong jus solis citizenship law that makes it very hard to lose Danish citizenship acquired by birth, like both the USA and Canada (one reason, I’m sure, why the Hon. Mr. Cruz of Texas probably found it just too much of a hassle to renounce his Canadian citizenship until a media campaign forced him to do it). One reason why certain countries, the USA among them, make it hard to lose jus solis citizenship is to prevent a government gone bad from using it as a weapon against responsibly dissident citizens (consider how Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn got treated by the late and unlamented USSR by way of contrast). Having jus solis citizenship himself, and having sons with jus sanguinis citizenship, Uncle Kepha is extremely reluctant to criticize the citizenship laws of states that have instituted and enforced a wide range of protections for human rights. Further, as a former US Consular officer who has had to determine whether certain individuals born abroad were US citizens or not, and question certain persons born in the US re the same (if the parents were in diplomatic status, US jus solis citizenship does not apply)., Uncle Kepha doesn’t think the USA has too “soft” a set of citizenship laws. Maybe Denmark’s similar.
This being said, had this ISIS girl been and American, and guilty of nasty crimes against people while doing ISIS’ bidding in Syria or some other place, she would have every right to an American jail cell (and the Bill of Rights protections in Articles I-X of our Constitution) had the FBI been waiting for her on the tarmac when she returned to the States.
I do not know what else may happen to this ISIS-ette in Denmark. Has Denmark given up on prosecuting her for any crimes?
davidafoot says
If a subject or a citizen of a country denies that country and moves to another such as the Islamic State with which they are at war and are not recognised, then the old original nation has every right to cancel its realationship with that individual. Self defence.
The Islamic State appears here and there and these people can go wherever such as Africa.
Alternatively if the UN considers that person’s state has disintegrated they can get a UN passport, no society should be obliged to receive such a person back because of their odious beliefs which can contaminate inocent people in the old state and the risk which they represent just by existing inside the old state which the Islamic State considered an enemy.
If the law of Denmark doesn’t protect the people of Denmark then it needs changing until its interpretation protects the Danes.