heard about the decision through the media and had not been made aware of any such impending process, highlighting this lack of transparency. This suggests that what would be considered an accepted threshold of 'undermining the security' has not been met. The government immediately publicly listed the names of the accused, including figures such as former MPs of the leading Shia movement, al-Wifaq, the head of the Bahrain Freedom Movement, and three Shia clerics - Hussein Mirza, Khaled Mansour Sanad and Alawi Sharaf. Although no conclusion can be made without a full trial, these individuals - all leading Shia opposition members - seem unlikely to have instrumented extreme militant acts, but making them non-citizens de-legitimises any of their criticisms towards the government. Interestingly, the Interior Minister Sheikh Rashid Al Khalifah further stated that one of the reasons behind this action was that the country had seen repeated abuse by these individuals “of the rights to freedom of speech and expression”9 which they deemed could no longer be accepted. It is not in any way clear how they came to the interpretation that these individuals had been enjoying too much of this fundamental right. They have shown no evidence of the need to derogate from this right in this circumstance but instead are claiming overstepping the necessary self-imposed limitations of this right justifies the withdrawal of nationality. Alongside the absurdity of the claim that someone has been practicing too much of their right to freedom of speech, the belief that rendering them stateless would forbid them from accessing the right to freedom of speech is worrying. In the international context, the Interior Ministry’s official statement and comments on state TV has claimed that citizenship would be revoked in conformity with the Kingdom's commitments under international law. Bahrain has not ratified either of the statelessness conventions, but it has other relevant instruments which it is now in the process of violating.10 It is unclear what will now happen to these former citizens, specifically the majority who still reside in Bahrain. Worryingly, all of the denationalized are of the Shia confession, highlighting suggestions floating in the media that members of this sect are more likely to be loyal to foreign states – namely Iran. This is a dangerous speculation that alienates and isolates this sector of society, and certainly does not address the prevalent socio-political problems of the country. This move may also render a sense of fear amongst other oppositions, especially those from the Shia sect, who could also face denaturalisation if they continue to be critical of the state. Another earlier example in 2011 of this means to delegitimize critical voice occurred in the United Arab Emirates (UAE). Seven Emirati activists had their nationality withdrawn from Bahrain government bans protests amid violence’ www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east20135218 9 10 For example the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights -4Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2376426