Latest news with #GlobalCitizenshipObservatory
Local France
2 days ago
- Politics
- Local France
How securing rights through citizenship has become 'increasingly fragile'
The first Global State of Citizenship report, by the Global Citizenship Observatory (GLOBALCIT) at the European University Institute (EUI) in Florence, analyses citizenship laws in 191 countries in 2024. Researchers found that "with the growing number of armed conflicts and incidence of terrorism worldwide, many countries have introduced provisions for withdrawing the citizenship of a person on the basis of national security grounds.' Over a third of countries, including many European ones, 'can now strip a person of their citizenship when their actions are seen as disloyal or threatening to state security,' the report says, and the trend has been expanding. The practice is linked to an 'increasing securitisation of citizenship' since the terrorist attacks of September 11th 2001 in the USA. Between 2000 and 2020, 18 European countries put in place measures to deprive persons of citizenship because of national security or to counter terrorism. Before 2001, these measures were 'virtually absent', the report says. Recently, the Swedish government commissioned an inquiry on the revocation of citizenship from individuals threatening national security . Germany's coalition parties discussed this option for 'supporters of terrorism, antisemites, and extremists'. Hungary also amended the constitution to allow the temporary suspension of citizenship because of national security. Middle East and North Africa are other regions where these policies have expanded, the report says. Advertisement Ways to strip citizenship The report identifies four ways in which citizens can be stripped of their status on security grounds. Nearly 80 per cent of countries have rules covering at least one of these situations. In 132 countries around the world, and two thirds of European states, citizenship can be removed for disloyalty or for acts that threaten national security, such treason, espionage, trying to overthrow a government or terrorism. Such rules exist in Belgium, Estonia, France, Germany, Greece, Ireland, the Netherlands, Switzerland, Turkey and the UK. In 89 countries, however, this rule concerns only to people who naturalised, not those who acquired citizenship by birth. Another reason that can lead to the stripping of citizenship is having committee serious criminal offences, which typically involves having been sentenced to imprisonment for a certain period. These rules exist in 79 countries but only a few in Europe. In 70 countries, citizenship can be removed for serving in a foreign army and in 18 this measure concerns only people who acquired citizenship by naturalisation. In Europe, 40 per cent of countries – including France, Germany, Greece, the Netherlands, Estonia, Turkey, Belarus and Bosnia Herzegovina – can remove citizenship under certain conditions for having served in another army. Latvia, one of the countries that can revoke citizenship for such reasons, changed the law in 2022 to allow its citizens to work with the Ukrainian military forces. Citizenship can also be removed for providing non-military services to another state, such as being elected in a public office, working for certain agencies or just in the civil service. Such rules exist in 75 countries around the world and some in Europe too, including France, Greece and Turkey. Advertisement People naturalised more at risk Luuk van der Baaren, co-author of the report, said at the presentation of the study that 'these developments indeed raise an important question as to what extent is citizenship still a secure legal status'. The data also shows that 'a large share of the citizenship stripping provisions are discriminatory in nature, as they only apply to specific groups, particularly citizens by naturalisation'. This is to prevent that a person remains stateless, but it means that 'citizens by birth have a secure legal status, while those who acquired citizenship later in life do not,' he added. Losing citizenship may not only affect the personal security and life opportunities, but also that of dependants, the report says, as in 40 per cent of countries citizenship deprivation can extend to children. Other ways of losing citizenship There are other ways, intentional or not, to lose citizenship, according to the report. The most common, is to have withdrawn because it was acquired in a fraudulent way. Such rules exist in 157 countries. 156 states have also rules on how to voluntarily renounce citizenship, usually with provisions to ensure that a person does not end up stateless. In 56 countries, people can lose their citizenship if they acquire another nationality, and in 55 this may occur by simply residing abroad. Under the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, 'everyone has the right to a nationality', but four million people in the world are stateless 'because their citizenship remains denied or unrecognised,' the report continues. On the other hand, 35 countries do not allow people to renounce citizenship, or make this impossible in practice. Advertisement Unequal rights The report also looks at ways to acquire citizenship and finds 'highly unequal pathways'. The most common naturalisation requirement knowledge. Less common are economic self-sufficiency, civic or cultural integration, language or citizenship tests, and renunciation of other citizenships. On residency requirements, Americas and Western Europe have the more inclusive measures. Citizenship in European countries is also regulated via the European Convention on Nationality, under which the residence requirement cannot exceed 10 years. In 15 countries the wait is longer than 10 years: Equatorial Guinea (40 years), United Arab Emirates (30), Bahrain (25), Qatar (25), Bhutan (20), Brunei (20), Eritrea (20), Oman (20), Chad (15), Gambia (15), Nigeria (15), Rwanda (15), Sierra Leone (15), St. Kitts and Nevis (14), and India (11).
Local Spain
2 days ago
- Politics
- Local Spain
How securing rights through citizenship has become 'increasingly fragile'
The first Global State of Citizenship report, by the Global Citizenship Observatory (GLOBALCIT) at the European University Institute (EUI) in Florence, analyses citizenship laws in 191 countries in 2024. Researchers found that "with the growing number of armed conflicts and incidence of terrorism worldwide, many countries have introduced provisions for withdrawing the citizenship of a person on the basis of national security grounds.' Over a third of countries, including many European ones, 'can now strip a person of their citizenship when their actions are seen as disloyal or threatening to state security,' the report says, and the trend has been expanding. The practice is linked to an 'increasing securitisation of citizenship' since the terrorist attacks of September 11th 2001 in the USA. Between 2000 and 2020, 18 European countries put in place measures to deprive persons of citizenship because of national security or to counter terrorism. Before 2001, these measures were 'virtually absent', the report says. revocation of citizenship from individuals threatening national security. Germany's coalition parties discussed this option for 'supporters of terrorism, antisemites, and extremists'. Hungary also amended the constitution to allow the temporary suspension of citizenship because of national security. Middle East and North Africa are other regions where these policies have expanded, the report says. Ways to strip citizenship The report identifies four ways in which citizens can be stripped of their status on security grounds. Nearly 80 per cent of countries have rules covering at least one of these situations. In 132 countries around the world, and two thirds of European states, citizenship can be removed for disloyalty or for acts that threaten national security, such treason, espionage, trying to overthrow a government or terrorism. Such rules exist in Belgium, Estonia, France, Germany, Greece, Ireland, the Netherlands, Switzerland, Turkey and the UK. In 89 countries, however, this rule concerns only to people who naturalised, not those who acquired citizenship by birth. Another reason that can lead to the stripping of citizenship is having committee serious criminal offences, which typically involves having been sentenced to imprisonment for a certain period. These rules exist in 79 countries but only a few in Europe. In 70 countries, citizenship can be removed for serving in a foreign army and in 18 this measure concerns only people who acquired citizenship by naturalisation. In Europe, 40 per cent of countries – including France, Germany, Greece, the Netherlands, Estonia, Turkey, Belarus and Bosnia Herzegovina – can remove citizenship under certain conditions for having served in another army. Latvia, one of the countries that can revoke citizenship for such reasons, changed the law in 2022 to allow its citizens to work with the Ukrainian military forces. Citizenship can also be removed for providing non-military services to another state, such as being elected in a public office, working for certain agencies or just in the civil service. Such rules exist in 75 countries around the world and some in Europe too, including France, Greece and Turkey. People naturalised more at risk Luuk van der Baaren, co-author of the report, said at the presentation of the study that 'these developments indeed raise an important question as to what extent is citizenship still a secure legal status'. The data also shows that 'a large share of the citizenship stripping provisions are discriminatory in nature, as they only apply to specific groups, particularly citizens by naturalisation'. This is to prevent that a person remains stateless, but it means that 'citizens by birth have a secure legal status, while those who acquired citizenship later in life do not,' he added. Losing citizenship may not only affect the personal security and life opportunities, but also that of dependants, the report says, as in 40 per cent of countries citizenship deprivation can extend to children. Other ways of losing citizenship There are other ways, intentional or not, to lose citizenship, according to the report. The most common, is to have withdrawn because it was acquired in a fraudulent way. Such rules exist in 157 countries. 156 states have also rules on how to voluntarily renounce citizenship, usually with provisions to ensure that a person does not end up stateless. In 56 countries, people can lose their citizenship if they acquire another nationality, and in 55 this may occur by simply residing abroad. Under the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, 'everyone has the right to a nationality', but four million people in the world are stateless 'because their citizenship remains denied or unrecognised,' the report continues. On the other hand, 35 countries do not allow people to renounce citizenship, or make this impossible in practice. Unequal rights The report also looks at ways to acquire citizenship and finds 'highly unequal pathways'. The most common naturalisation requirement knowledge. Less common are economic self-sufficiency, civic or cultural integration, language or citizenship tests, and renunciation of other citizenships. On residency requirements, Americas and Western Europe have the more inclusive measures. Citizenship in European countries is also regulated via the European Convention on Nationality, under which the residence requirement cannot exceed 10 years. In 15 countries the wait is longer than 10 years: Equatorial Guinea (40 years), United Arab Emirates (30), Bahrain (25), Qatar (25), Bhutan (20), Brunei (20), Eritrea (20), Oman (20), Chad (15), Gambia (15), Nigeria (15), Rwanda (15), Sierra Leone (15), St. Kitts and Nevis (14), and India (11).
Local Germany
2 days ago
- Politics
- Local Germany
How securing rights through citizenship has become 'increasingly fragile'
The first Global State of Citizenship report, by the Global Citizenship Observatory (GLOBALCIT) at the European University Institute (EUI) in Florence, analyses citizenship laws in 191 countries in 2024. Researchers found that "with the growing number of armed conflicts and incidence of terrorism worldwide, many countries have introduced provisions for withdrawing the citizenship of a person on the basis of national security grounds.' Over a third of countries, including many European ones, 'can now strip a person of their citizenship when their actions are seen as disloyal or threatening to state security,' the report says, and the trend has been expanding. The practice is linked to an 'increasing securitisation of citizenship' since the terrorist attacks of September 11th 2001 in the USA. Between 2000 and 2020, 18 European countries put in place measures to deprive persons of citizenship because of national security or to counter terrorism. Before 2001, these measures were 'virtually absent', the report says. Recently, the Swedish government commissioned an inquiry on the revocation of citizenship from individuals threatening national security . Germany's coalition parties discussed this option for 'supporters of terrorism, antisemites, and extremists'. Hungary also amended the constitution to allow the temporary suspension of citizenship because of national security. Middle East and North Africa are other regions where these policies have expanded, the report says. Advertisement Ways to strip citizenship The report identifies four ways in which citizens can be stripped of their status on security grounds. Nearly 80 per cent of countries have rules covering at least one of these situations. In 132 countries around the world, and two thirds of European states, citizenship can be removed for disloyalty or for acts that threaten national security, such treason, espionage, trying to overthrow a government or terrorism. Such rules exist in Belgium, Estonia, France, Germany, Greece, Ireland, the Netherlands, Switzerland, Turkey and the UK. In 89 countries, however, this rule concerns only to people who naturalised, not those who acquired citizenship by birth. Another reason that can lead to the stripping of citizenship is having committee serious criminal offences, which typically involves having been sentenced to imprisonment for a certain period. These rules exist in 79 countries but only a few in Europe. In 70 countries, citizenship can be removed for serving in a foreign army and in 18 this measure concerns only people who acquired citizenship by naturalisation. In Europe, 40 per cent of countries – including France, Germany, Greece, the Netherlands, Estonia, Turkey, Belarus and Bosnia Herzegovina – can remove citizenship under certain conditions for having served in another army. Latvia, one of the countries that can revoke citizenship for such reasons, changed the law in 2022 to allow its citizens to work with the Ukrainian military forces. Citizenship can also be removed for providing non-military services to another state, such as being elected in a public office, working for certain agencies or just in the civil service. Such rules exist in 75 countries around the world and some in Europe too, including France, Greece and Turkey. Advertisement People naturalised more at risk Luuk van der Baaren, co-author of the report, said at the presentation of the study that 'these developments indeed raise an important question as to what extent is citizenship still a secure legal status'. The data also shows that 'a large share of the citizenship stripping provisions are discriminatory in nature, as they only apply to specific groups, particularly citizens by naturalisation'. This is to prevent that a person remains stateless, but it means that 'citizens by birth have a secure legal status, while those who acquired citizenship later in life do not,' he added. Losing citizenship may not only affect the personal security and life opportunities, but also that of dependants, the report says, as in 40 per cent of countries citizenship deprivation can extend to children. Other ways of losing citizenship There are other ways, intentional or not, to lose citizenship, according to the report. The most common, is to have withdrawn because it was acquired in a fraudulent way. Such rules exist in 157 countries. 156 states have also rules on how to voluntarily renounce citizenship, usually with provisions to ensure that a person does not end up stateless. In 56 countries, people can lose their citizenship if they acquire another nationality, and in 55 this may occur by simply residing abroad. Under the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, 'everyone has the right to a nationality', but four million people in the world are stateless 'because their citizenship remains denied or unrecognised,' the report continues. On the other hand, 35 countries do not allow people to renounce citizenship, or make this impossible in practice. Advertisement Unequal rights The report also looks at ways to acquire citizenship and finds 'highly unequal pathways'. The most common naturalisation requirement knowledge. Less common are economic self-sufficiency, civic or cultural integration, language or citizenship tests, and renunciation of other citizenships. On residency requirements, Americas and Western Europe have the more inclusive measures. Citizenship in European countries is also regulated via the European Convention on Nationality, under which the residence requirement cannot exceed 10 years. In 15 countries the wait is longer than 10 years: Equatorial Guinea (40 years), United Arab Emirates (30), Bahrain (25), Qatar (25), Bhutan (20), Brunei (20), Eritrea (20), Oman (20), Chad (15), Gambia (15), Nigeria (15), Rwanda (15), Sierra Leone (15), St. Kitts and Nevis (14), and India (11).
New York Times
29-01-2025
- Politics
- New York Times
Citizenship by Birthright? By Bloodline? Migration Is Complicating Both.
For two summers during high school, instead of joining her classmates at the beach, Noura Ghazoui had an internship at the town hall of her hometown, Borghetto Santo Spirito, on the Ligurian coast. But when she tried to apply for a job there at age 19, she found herself ineligiblebecause, like hundreds of thousands of children born to immigrants in Italy, she could not get Italian citizenship. 'I feel Italian, I think in Italian, I dream in Italian,' Ms. Ghazoui said in Ligurian-accented Italian. 'But I am not recognized in my country.' For generations, European countries have used mostly bloodlines to determine citizenship. The United States was an exception in the West as one of the last countries to grant citizenship unconditionally to virtually anyone born there. President Trump's order seeking to end birthright citizenship for the American-born children of undocumented immigrants, which a judge temporarily blocked last week, would bring the United States one step closer to Italy and other European countries. But rising numbers of migrants in the United States and Europe have set off debates on both sides of the Atlantic over whether the systems for bestowing citizenship need to be updated in some way, either moderated or stiffened. Each approach — known by the Latin terms 'jus sanguinis,' or right of blood, and 'jus soli,' or right of soil — has its critics, and increasingly, countries have sought to rebalance the two. Since the 1980s, Britain and Ireland (as well as Australia and New Zealand), which still had unconditional birthright citizenship, have moved in a direction similar to that Mr. Trump has chosen, limiting it. But others, like Germany, have gone the other way, making it easier for people born to immigrants to gain citizenship. The shift, supporters say, nodded to the changing realities of a country where one in four people now comes from an immigrant background. 'Citizenship is a politically contested issue,' said Maarten Vink, the co-director of the Global Citizenship Observatory. 'When it changes it reflects the outcome of a political struggle.' A Tug of War in Europe In Europe, bloodline citizenship has helped maintain ties with citizens who leave the country, and their descendants. But most countries in Europe also offer some form of birthright citizenship, though usually with tough restrictions. In Europe, citizenship has at times been mixed with dangerous concepts of racism and ethnic purity, especially in colonial times and during the Nazi era, when Hitler's regime stripped Jews of their citizenship before killing them. Today support for limiting access to citizenship for immigrants, as well as securing borders, is not found only on the far right. But the arguments have been harnessed by some of the continent's extreme right-wing forces, who speak of a need to preserve cultural and ethnic identity. 'We must stop migratory flows,' Jordan Bardella, the president of the far-right National Rally in France, said earlier this month. 'Many French people, including even some who are of immigrant descent, no longer recognize France and no longer recognize the country they grew up in.' Mr. Bardella's party wants to abolish law that allows the children of foreigners born in the country to apply for citizenship at 18, as long as they meet minimal residency requirements. While citizenship has often been described as a vehicle for belonging, it has also been a powerful means of exclusion, said Dimitry Kochenov, a professor at the Central European University and the author of the book 'Citizenship.' 'Citizenship has been used by the state in order to denigrate certain groups,' Mr. Kochenov said. The Italian Example In previous centuries, a much poorer Italy was a country from which millions of citizens emigrated abroad, mostly to the Americas, in search of a better life. Generous bloodline citizenship rules helped Italy maintain a link with the diaspora. Even today churches and town halls around Italy are clogged with requests from Argentines, Brazilians and Americans who have the right to claim citizenship through distant Italian ancestry. (Most recently, President Javier Milei of Argentina obtained Italian citizenship.) But Italy has in recent decades turned from a land where people emigrate into one that also receives large numbers of immigrants. And while Italy has changed, its citizenship law has not. Italy does not grant citizenship to the children of immigrants who have legal status in the country. The Italian-born children of immigrants can only apply for citizenship once they turn 18; they have one year to apply and must prove they have lived in the Italy the whole time. That ruled out Ms. Ghazoui, who spent part of her childhood in Morocco, where her parents are from. Now, 34, an employee at a company providing naval supplies, she has an Italian husband and an Italian child, and applied for citizenship based on protracted residency in the country. 'I am the only one in the house who is not Italian and not recognized,' she said. While the public health-care system in Italy makes no distinction between citizens and noncitizens, second-generation children of immigrants face numerous hurdles. About 600,000 children born to immigrants study in Italian schools. They have often known no other country than Italy, but with no claim to citizenship, their lives are complicated. Many cannot travel around Europe on school trips, and have to miss school o renew their residence permits. They also say they are constantly reminded that they are different from their classmates. Many Italian-born adults are in the same situation. 'Precariousness becomes the basis of your life,' said Sonny Olumati, 38, a dancer and choreographer who was born in Rome to Nigerian parents and still does not have Italian citizenship. 'You create a sense of non-belonging.' Italy's leaders support the law as it currently stands. Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni, a hard-line conservative whose Brothers of Italy party has post-Fascist roots, has said that 'Italy has a great citizenship law.' Tying the citizenship of children to that of their parents is convenient, Ms. Meloni argues, in case the immigrants return to their countries/ She also said that she had higher priorities than changing the citizenship law. Despite the government's position, grass-roots associations proposed a referendum that would reduce the period of uninterrupted residence in Italy needed to become an Italian citizen to five years from 10. The vote is set to happen in the spring. 'This law does no longer represent the real Italy,' said Alba Lala, 27, the secretary of CoNNGI, a group that represents new Italian generations. 'It's completely outdated.' Birthright in a Modern Age? Some critics say much the same about unconditional birthright citizenship. About 20 percent of countries use it, most in North and South America. The United States and Canada inherited the law from Britain, but birthright citizenship also fulfilled an important role in the newly independent countries as a way to constitute a nation. Like those who favor bloodline citizenship, birthright advocates say it promotes social cohesion, but for a different reason — because no child is left out. In the United States, the 14th Amendment allowed men and women of African descent to become citizens, and millions of children of Irish, German and other European immigrants became citizens as well. But unconditional birthright citizenship remains an exception. 'In a world of massive migration and irregular migration, unconditional ius soli is an anachronism,' said Christian Joppke, a professor of sociology at the University of Bern. Still, some argue that the Trump' administration is not setting out to modernize a law but instead is trying to redefine the nation itself. 'It rejects the idea of America as a nation of immigrants,' said Hiroshi Motomura, an immigration and citizenship expert at the University of California, Los Angeles, School of Law. Even under the current rules in the United States, birthright citizenship is not absolute. They exclude, for instance, the children of diplomats born in the United States. And children of American citizens born abroad maintain an automatic right to American citizenship — in effect bloodline citizenry. Citizenship by descent 'is a really good way to connect with people who live outside the borders of a state,' said Mr. Vink. 'But if you want to ensure you are also being inclusive within the borders of a state, you have to also have territorial birthright.' Otherwise, he said, countries would have millions in their population who are not citizens. 'In a democracy,' he said, 'that is not a good principle.'
