Frightening for Muslims and asylum seekers Learn about the most prominent amendments to the British Nationality Law

Despite her argument that the law will be in the interest of those who deserve asylum, a recent British Home Office decision has increased the anxiety of asylum seekers, and related to the rejection of any Syrian asylum application under the justification that Syria is safe and there is no danger to his life if he returns to it.

Immigrants and minorities in Britain put their hands on their hearts as they await the controversial "Nationality and Borders" law, with unprecedented provisions, including granting the British Home Office the power to withdraw citizenship from anyone, even without informing them.

Boris Johnson's government succeeded in passing the bill in the House of Commons after 298 deputies voted in favor of it, against 231 votes in opposition, to pass to the House of Lords for a vote, after which it becomes effective in the coming weeks.

The law raises many concerns among British citizens of minorities; Which made the Muslim Council of Britain - which is the largest gathering of Muslims in the country - in addition to the British Sikh gathering to announce the organization of a series of vigils in front of the British Prime Minister's headquarters; rejection of this law.

The law also targets asylum seekers coming to Britain, as there have been many indications that obtaining asylum in Britain will not be easy.

What's new in the citizenship law?

The most important change in the Nationality and Borders Law is that it grants the Ministry of the Interior the authority to withdraw citizenship from any British citizen who appears to it to pose a threat to the country's national security, and the Ministry has the right to withdraw citizenship without informing the person concerned.

The other changes are related to asylum applications, as the law will prevent people who have arrived in the country illegally from obtaining asylum.

The law also permits the use of a "return from sea" policy; That is, allowing the coast guard forces to force the migrant boats back where they came from.

The law paves the way for implementing a system of transferring asylum seekers to shelters outside the country until their asylum claims are decided upon, and enables asylum seekers to be placed on remote islands or African countries without entering Britain, even if their asylum application is rejected and they are sent back to their countries.

Why does the law raise all this controversy?

What raises the most fears of British minorities is allowing the Ministry of the Interior to withdraw citizenship without informing its owner, which made a number of human rights defenders fear the description of "second-class citizens".

More than 20 institutions and civil and human rights organizations from Muslims, Sikhs and other minorities unanimously reject this provision in the law, stressing that it will not apply to white Britons because they have no citizenship or foreign origins.

On the other hand, British citizens of foreign origin can withdraw their citizenship, because they hold the citizenship of another country, as international law forbids any country to leave any citizen without citizenship.

Are there precedents for Britain to withdraw citizenship?

The procedure for withdrawing citizenship is legally complicated, but this has not prevented dozens of people from withdrawing it over the years.

The British mention the case known as the "Windrush", in which the victims were citizens known as the "Windrush" generation; Those who arrived in Britain after World War II were immigrants from Jamaica, Trinidad and Tobago and other islands, as a response to the labor shortage in the United Kingdom after World War II.

They lived in Britain for decades, but they were deprived of health services, and there was a secret scheme by the British Home Office to forcibly deport them, and not to recognize them as British citizens.

After this scandal erupted in 2018, the then Home Secretary resigned, and an official apology was offered to the "Windrush" generation, who bear this name after the ship "Windrush Empire", which took them to Britain for the first time.

Can this law be dropped?

Paul O'Connor, an official in the Trade and Government Services Union - which is the sixth largest union in the United Kingdom - announced that they will seek the judiciary's opinion on this law, especially in its part related to the return of migrant boats at sea.

The official - to A J news Net - expressed his union's concerns about the legitimacy of this law, and the legal consequences that it could entail for coast guard workers.

The union confirmed that it needs the opinion of the judiciary, which will decide whether its provisions are illegal; Therefore, the Coast Guard will not implement it, or the court will declare it legal, and thus they will be safe from any legal follow-up in the event that the return of the boats resulted in the drowning of the migrants in it.

What are the British government's justifications?

The British government says that the revocation of citizenship will relate to those involved in terrorist acts, espionage or war criminals, and will be used to a very limited extent.

The government defends the decision not to allow asylum seekers to enter the country illegally by closing the door on human trafficking networks, and for asylum seekers not to consider risking their lives at sea.

The government promises to speed up the processing of asylum applications and not delay them, as well as to quickly deport people whose asylum claims are rejected.

Although she argues that the law will be in the interest of those who deserve asylum, a recent decision by the British Home Office has increased the concern of asylum seekers, and it is related to rejecting the asylum application of any Syrian under the justification that Syria has become safe and there is no danger to his life if he returns to it, and this decision is the first Of its kind since the outbreak of the Syrian revolution.

Russia threatens to resort to military solutions to achieve its security if the political track fails

"Moscow will resort to military solutions to neutralize threats to its security if political means are not enough to achieve this," the Interfax news agency quoted Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Alexander Grushko as saying on Wednesday.

Grushko's comments came after talks in Brussels between Russia and NATO over Moscow's security demands. The Russian news agency quoted him as saying that during the talks, Moscow reviewed possible countermeasures that it could take in the event of the failure of the political track.

"The situation is very dangerous, but it is not yet clear how to overcome the obstacles between the two sides to make progress," Grushko added.

"Moscow wants written responses from NATO to its proposals for comprehensive security guarantees and how it will implement them or why it cannot do so if it decides not to implement them," he said.

"Moscow will then be able to determine its own path," Grushko added, warning that the alliance could not simply pick from the security proposals on the list submitted by Russia.