The Home Office will not revoke the British citizenship of activist Alaa Abd el-Fattah, with government sources stating his past social media posts, though deemed "abhorrent," do not meet the high legal threshold required for such a sanction.
Political Storm Over Decade-Old Tweets
Alaa Abd el-Fattah, who arrived in the UK from Egypt on Boxing Day, has become the centre of a political controversy following the resurfacing of tweets he posted over ten years ago. In the posts, he called for the killing of Zionists and made other inflammatory remarks.
Prime Minister Keir Starmer, who said he was "delighted" by the activist's arrival last Friday following a government-backed effort to secure his release from an Egyptian prison, has since condemned the historic tweets. Starmer stated he was unaware of their content at the time of Abd el-Fattah's arrival.
In response to the case, Foreign Secretary Yvette Cooper has initiated a review into potential "serious information failures." This comes after both Conservative and Labour governments had previously lobbied Egypt for his release as a political prisoner.
High Legal Bar Prevents Citizenship Stripping
Government sources have clarified that the legal evidential case for revoking Abd el-Fattah's citizenship has not changed in the twelve years since the posts were made, a period during which he was granted citizenship in 2021 via his mother's UK birth.
The legal bar for removing citizenship is intentionally set very high, requiring evidence that it was obtained by fraud or that the individual is a terrorist, extremist, or serious organised criminal. Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood is unlikely to act unless these strict criteria are met.
The decision not to strip citizenship carries a right of appeal, a process seen in the high-profile case of Shamima Begum, who lost her appeal against the revocation of her citizenship in 2019.
Warnings Over a 'Slippery Slope'
The calls from opposition parties, including the Conservatives and Reform UK, for Abd el-Fattah's deportation and loss of citizenship have drawn sharp criticism from human rights campaigners. They argue that punishing speech with citizenship removal is a dangerous precedent.
Steve Valdez-Symonds, Amnesty International UK’s migrant rights director, stated: "Stripping someone of their citizenship because of what they may say or tweet would be an extremely authoritarian step."
Conservative MP and former cabinet minister David Davis expressed concern over politicians wielding such power, calling it a "vertical slippery slope." He argued that while the initial grant of citizenship might have been questionable, any revocation should be a judicial, not political, decision.
Chris Doyle of the Council for Arab-British Understanding, who supported the activist's release, called the tweets "appalling" but urged understanding of the highly charged Egyptian social media context at the time, noting Abd el-Fattah is not an Islamist.
Downing Street has defended its actions, with a spokesperson stating the UK welcomes the return of any British citizen unfairly detained abroad, a commitment central to Britain's stance on political freedom. They reiterated, however, that the government considers the historic tweets "abhorrent."
The case has raised significant questions about the vetting process before Abd el-Fattah was granted citizenship in 2021 and the research conducted by the government before advocating for his release—a cause championed by former prime ministers Boris Johnson and Rishi Sunak.
