The UK's Citizenship Stripping Escalation: From Counter-Terrorism Tool to Paranoia-Driven Policy! By Richard Miller (London)
The United Kingdom's use of citizenship deprivation powers has evolved from a targeted measure against terrorism to a broader instrument applied in cases that raise questions about transparency, due process, and the threshold for "national security" threats. The latest case, reported by the Daily Mail on January 12, 2026, involves Mark Bullen, a 45-year-old former Hertfordshire Police officer with 11 years of service, who had his British citizenship revoked by Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood in October 2025 on unspecified "national security" grounds, after he relocated to Russia in 2014, became a dual Russian citizen in 2022, and built a family life in St. Petersburg. Oh, he is white as well.
Bullen's background is far from that of a typical security risk: He joined the police after early experiences in Russia (teaching English in St. Petersburg at 18), authored a training handbook on Russian crime and prison tattoos drawing on his fluency in the language, earned commendations including "officer of the year," and helped resolve incidents non-violently. After leaving the force, he worked in media for Zenit St. Petersburg football club. His only documented UK encounter post-relocation was a November 2024 detention at Luton Airport under the Terrorism Act — questioned for four hours, subjected to DNA sampling, fingerprints, and searches, but released without charge or further action. No evidence of wrongdoing has been publicly disclosed, and Bullen vehemently denies any threat, calling the revocation "ridiculous" and "comical," insisting he has a "perfect police record" and questioning how a nation priding itself on "freedom and liberty" could act this way without proof.
Under Section 40 of the British Nationality Act 1981, the Home Secretary can deprive a person of citizenship if deemed "conducive to the public good," a power expanded significantly since the 2000s in response to jihadist threats. Crucially, it applies only to dual nationals (to avoid statelessness), which Bullen became in 2022 — ironically, a factor enabling the revocation. The Home Office has refused to comment on specifics, leaving the public, and Bullen, with a vague "national security" label amid UK-Russia hostilities, including the ongoing Ukraine war, espionage rows (e.g., Russia's January 2026 expulsion of a British diplomat accused of spying), and broader sanctions.
This case marks a potential new level of application: stripping citizenship not for active involvement in terrorism, espionage, or radicalisation (as in high-profile instances who joined ISIS), but seemingly for long-term residence in a hostile state, cultural affinity, or mere dual nationality acquisition. Critics, including online commentators on platforms like Reddit, express unease: Why no evidence presented? Could this set a precedent for revoking citizenship based on geopolitical guilt-by-association rather than concrete acts? One Reddit user noted the hypocrisy in some reactions — support for stripping Begum's citizenship contrasted with outrage here — while others worried about "minimal recourse" and future overreach.
Defenders of the policy might argue that in a time of hybrid threats, where influence operations, intelligence recruitment, or passive support for adversarial regimes pose risks, proactive measures are justified. Bullen's choice to naturalise as Russian post-2022 full-scale invasion of Ukraine, and his decision to remain there, could be seen as aligning with a state sponsoring aggression against European neighbours and conducting cyber/hybrid campaigns against the UK. Yet without transparency, the decision fuels perceptions of paranoia: Is the UK now treating ordinary expatriates (or those with foreign ties) as latent threats simply for living abroad in "unfriendly" countries?
The implications are profound. Citizenship stripping erodes the principle that nationality is a fundamental right, not a revocable privilege contingent on political winds. It risks chilling freedom of movement, dual identities, and even academic/cultural engagement with other nations. Bullen, now effectively barred from easy return to the UK (and family visits complicated), plans to stay in Russia, where he feels settled. For others, it sends a message: Pursue dual citizenship or long-term life in certain countries at your peril — your British passport could be withdrawn unilaterally, with little public accountability.
As UK-Russia relations remain frozen and national security rhetoric intensifies, cases like this test the balance between protecting the realm and preserving civil liberties. If "national security" becomes a catch-all justification applied with opacity, what was once a narrow counter-terror tool could morph into a mechanism for ideological conformity or geopolitical score-settling. Bullen's revocation, seemingly without bombs, plots, or espionage, suggests Britain may indeed be entering a phase of heightened suspicion, where paranoia about foreign influence risks undermining the very values it claims to defend. This is the thin end of a wedge toward a more authoritarian citizenship regime. Expect any tyranny for the UK now.
