The following Question stood upon the Order Paper:59. Mr. PETER FREEMAN,—To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, whether he has received and considered the report from the Committee on Deprivation of Citizenship on Karl Strauss and Antonin Raidl; and what action he has decided to take in these cases.
§ Mr. EdeWith permission, Sir, I would like to answer Question No. 59.
I have considered the reports of the Committee, and have made orders depriving both men of their citizenship of the United Kingdom and Colonies.
Mr. FreemanIn view of the publicity which this case has had, may I ask my right hon. Friend whether he is aware that there is another man, named Weisskopf, who was mentioned in the proceedings of this Committee? Is not this man also a naturalised Czech, and has he not been deprived of his citizenship of this country? Is there any evidence or information that he was associated with the activities which led to the proceedings by which Strauss was deprived of citizenship?
§ Mr. EdeI have no reason to suppose that Weisskopf was asociated with Strauss in any discreditable activities. The fact that his name was mentioned by Strauss in the proceedings should not be held against him.
§ Mr. MarloweWhat will be the effect of all this on the man Strauss, who is said to be in this country? Is he to be allowed to remain here?
§ Mr. EdeI shall have to consider what ought to be done with him. He is certainly not now a British subject.
§ Sir Herbert WilliamsWhat is the position of a man who is living in this country and who is now apparently stateless? I believe that Strauss was here last night, but I did not meet him and I do not know him. Surely we must be careful that we do not put a man into what I might call a complete national vacuum.
§ Mr. EdeWhen people come to this country and we admit them to the high privilege of British citizenship, and they 2515 so misbehave themselves as to be recommended by this Committee for deprivation of citizenship, I am bound to say that is a matter which they should have taken into consideration before they committed the acts which place them in that position.
§ Mr. Nigel FisherIn view of Strauss's expulsion for espionage will the right hon. Gentleman see that he leaves the country again as soon as possible?
§ Mr. EdeThere are difficulties about that, including those raised by the hon. Member for Croydon, East (Sir H. Williams). I am well aware of the danger that this man presents to the security of this country. I shall take such steps as are open to me to protect the country.
§ Mr. Kenneth ThompsonCan the right hon. Gentleman say whether the fact that this man has been deprived of British citizenship increases or decreases his prospect of employment in the Festival of Britain, which he is said to be seeking?
§ Mr. EdeI should have thought that the advertisement which the hon. Gentleman has given to the application would help to secure its being turned down.
§ Mr. S. SilvermanCan my right hon. Friend say whether this man has ever been accused of any criminal offence and whether, if he has, he will be prosecuted in the usual way?
§ Mr. EdeThis man had an opportunity of defending himself, which he took, before the Committee, where he was represented by solicitor and counsel. If he has committed a crime in this country for which he can be brought before a court, I have no doubt that appropriate action will be taken.
§ Sir H. WilliamsI do not know this man Strauss, but I have some sympathy with the rights of human beings. Can this man sue? Can he be sued? Is he an outlaw? What is he? I hope that the right hon. Gentleman will not make a decision of principle because of a particularly bad case?
§ Mr. EdeI am not making any decision of principle. Every one of these cases is considered on its merits. Strauss is in exactly the same position today as any other person within the Realm who is not a British subject.
§ Mr. S. SilvermanIs my right hon. Friend aware that other people have suffered enormous mischief and injury by their involuntary association with this case? If any offence has ever been alleged, an ordinary criminal offence, against this man, ought not a charge be properly formulated and properly investigated? If he has not committed any such offence, why should innocent third parties be left to bear and suffer injury for which they appear to have no remedy of any kind?
§ Mr. EdeThis man mentioned Mr. Weisskopf in the course of his evidence before the Committee, and that is how Mr. Weisskopf's name came to be associated with his. I hope that what I have said today indicates that there is no ground for holding that against Mr. Weisskopf.