British nationals stripped of their citizenship for alleged links to Syrian groups are questioning their legal status as the UK government considers removing Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS) from its terror list, raising complex questions about justice, security and discrimination.
The dramatic fall of Bashar al-Assad’s regime in December 2024 has transformed Syria’s political landscape, with HTS emerging as the dominant force in the country’s new interim government. The group, once affiliated with al-Qaeda, now controls Damascus and has prompted Western governments to reconsider their approach.
“As of now, I am deprived of my UK citizenship but I’m not a convicted terrorist,” said Tauqir Sharif, known as Tox, who travelled to Syria in 2012 as an aid worker.
Sharif was accused of being part of a group affiliated with al-Qaeda, which he denies. The then-Home Secretary Amber Rudd stripped him of his British citizenship in 2017. He has refused to participate in Special Immigration Appeals Commission (SIAC) proceedings, citing the secret nature of the courts.
“We boycotted the SIAC secret courts, which don’t allow you to see any of the evidence presented against you,” Sharif explained. “And one of the things that I always called for was, look, put me in front of a jury, let’s have an open hearing.”
Government’s Shifting Position
Foreign Secretary David Lammy’s recent visit to Damascus to meet Ahmed al-Sharaa, formerly known as Abu Mohammad al-Jolani, signals a significant shift in UK policy. The HTS leader has publicly distanced himself from al-Qaeda since 2016 and pledged protection for minorities.
Pat McFadden, Minister for Intergovernmental Relations, told BBC Radio 4 that removing HTS from the terror list would be a “relatively swift decision” given Syria’s fluid situation. “The leader of that group has distanced himself away from some of the things that have been said in the past,” McFadden stated.
In July 2025, the United States removed the foreign terrorist designation from HTS, stating it had “committed to combat terrorism in all its forms”. The UK and EU have progressively removed sanctions against Syria throughout 2025, though restrictions remain on military goods and individuals linked to the Assad government.
Record Numbers Stripped of Citizenship
According to the Parliamentary Joint Human Rights Committee, the UK “uses deprivation of citizenship orders more than almost any country in the world. The practice peaked in 2017 when 104 orders were made, primarily relating to Syria and the rise of Islamic State.
From 2010 to 2023, at least 1,080 deprivation orders were issued, with 858 for fraud and 222 on grounds of being “conducive to the public good”. Before 2003, when the power was used against Muslim preacher Abu Hamza, no citizenship removal had been authorised for 30 years.
The most high-profile case remains Shamima Begum, who travelled to Syria aged 15 in 2015. Her citizenship was revoked in 2019, leaving her stranded in a Syrian detention camp. The Court of Appeal upheld the decision in February 2024, ruling she was technically eligible for Bangladeshi citizenship and therefore not rendered stateless.
Discrimination Concerns Mount
Critics argue the powers disproportionately target British Muslims with South Asian or Middle Eastern heritage. The Institute of Race Relations reported in 2022 that “the vast majority of those deprived are Muslim men with South Asian or Middle Eastern/North African heritage”.
“Changes to citizenship law which have created these classes of citizenship were brought in to target British Muslims of south Asian and Middle Eastern heritage,” stated Frances Webber, IRR vice-chair and report author.
The controversial powers create what critics call “second-class citizenship”. While sole nationals cannot lose their British citizenship regardless of crimes committed, an estimated 6 million British citizens with potential access to another nationality face this possibility.
“Such divisions act as a constant reminder to minority ethnic citizens that they must watch their step,” Webber added.
Legal Challenges and Transparency Issues
Jonathan Hall KC, the independent reviewer of terrorism legislation, has repeatedly called for greater oversight of citizenship deprivation powers. Owing to how frequently this power is used, it should be something that the independent reviewer should have the power to review,” Hall told Sky News. “I asked, my predecessor asked, we’ve both been told no, so I agree there’s a lack of transparency.”
The Home Office has twice refused Freedom of Information requests for breakdowns of second nationalities among those stripped of citizenship, citing national security grounds. This lack of transparency has fuelled concerns about discriminatory application of the powers.
The Nationality and Borders Act 2022 further expanded these powers, allowing citizenship removal without notification. Critics argue this leaves individuals unable to challenge decisions until they attempt to return to the UK or seek consular assistance abroad.
Complex Path Forward
Even if HTS is delisted, legal experts note this would not automatically invalidate previous citizenship deprivations. Macer Gifford, a former YPG volunteer who fought against ISIS, argued that decisions “made years ago in the interest of the British public have to remain”.
We can’t sort of go through previous cases nitpicking through it, wasting time and money to bring it up to date,” Gifford told Sky News. “The intent to go out, the decision to go in itself is a huge decision for them. So it shows commitment.”
However, the situation raises uncomfortable questions about justice and proportionality. Many of those stripped of citizenship have never been convicted of terrorism offences. Some, like Sharif, maintain they were humanitarian workers caught in complex conflict zones.
Security Versus Rights
The Home Office maintains these powers are essential for national security. A spokesperson stated: “Deprivation of citizenship only happens after careful consideration of the facts and in accordance with international law. It is used against those who have acquired citizenship by fraud and against the most dangerous people, such as terrorists, extremists and serious organised criminals.”
More than 900 people travelled from the UK to engage with the conflict in Syria and Iraq. Officials report at least 20% were killed in the region, while about 40% have returned and been investigated. The majority were assessed as posing no or low security risk.
The situation in Syrian camps remains dire, with approximately 120,000 people residing in Al Roj and Al Hawl camps, including 30,000 children under 12. The Kurdish-led Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) have repeatedly asked countries to repatriate their citizens.
International Perspective
The UN Security Council would need unanimous agreement from all 15 member states to remove HTS from its terror list. According to Kiho Cha, a Senior Political Affairs Officer at the UN, “There may be Member States discussing the possibility of proposing such delisting, but that request has not been made official.
Sir John Sawers, former head of MI6, called it “rather ridiculous” if London was unable to engage with HTS due to the ban. As Syria enters a period of profound uncertainty, the UK faces difficult decisions balancing security concerns with human rights obligations.
The debate highlights fundamental questions about citizenship, belonging and justice in modern Britain. As the government weighs removing HTS from the terror list, hundreds of British nationals remain in legal limbo, their futures uncertain and their rights contested.
Follow for more updates on Britannia Daily
