Thread by @UnisNotBorders

THREAD

There have been a lot of superficial discussions re- clause 9 of the Nationality and Borders Bill which seeks to remove British citizenship without notice.

What isn't being discussed is clause 9 relation to extending UK's counter-terrorism/War on Terror laws.

Firstly, clause 9 didn't come out of nowhere. During the early days of the War on Terror, @UKLabour included the deprivation of British nationality section to the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002.

The deprivation of British nationality within the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002 meant that if a British-dual national committed acts that seriously prejudiced the interests of the UK and it's overseas territories that their British citizenship would be revoked.

Although this section of the act was stipulated for British dual nationals, it was never intended for those who would be rendered stateless if British citizenship was revoked. But as we can clearly see, this part of the act has been forgotten in the case of Shamima Begum.

And as @freemovementlaw has shown from 2011-2017, citizenship deprivation have been increasing, thanks to the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002.

This idea that only clause 9 of the Nationality and Borders Bill solely makes British citizenship conditional ignores how British citizenship has always been constructed as conditional from the Aliens Act of 1905, which prevented Jews fleeing pogroms entry in to the UK to...

...the Immigration Act 1971, ending the right of colony & Commonwealth citizens to enter Britain, to the British Nationality Act 1981 that defined a British citizen as those "closely connected" tying British citizenship to patriality & whiteness, excluding racialised migrants.

Likewise, while @UKLabour MPs who argued against the Nationality and Borders Bill voiced their concerned about clause 9, they forget (some rather intentionally) that it was Labour immigration policy that strengthened citizenship deprivation during the start of the War on Terror.

And as @Conservatives extend counter-terrorism policies to include environmental & other progressive, & left-wing activism in its orbit, clause 9 will be disperporatinately used against British dual-citizens who engage in activism that is deemed by the state as 'terrorism'.

Also, as the @Conservatives criminalise the right of protesting, we need to link clause 9 to a broader discussion on how it relates & is linked to existing counter-terror legislation & how it's intension is to limit & criminalise migrant political expression.

But the disproportionate attention on clause 9 also masks so many other deeply troubling aspects of the Nationality and Borders Bill, such as criminalising undocumented migrants & charging them with 4 years prison sentences before deporting them. freemovement.org.uk/four-year-maxi…

It is disappointing that so many people are more invested in getting rid of clause 9 of the Nationality and Borders Bill rather than creating the disruptions necessary to stop this *entire* bill from becoming law!

The bill's intended aim is to harm & criminalise asylum seekers.