States of Being and Being of States: Citizenship and Statelessness in Domestic and International Law

States of Being and Being of States: Citizenship and Statelessness in Domestic and International Law

Nationality is a legal bond between a person and a State. People’s nationality provides them with a sense of identity but, more importantly, enables them to exercise a wide range of rights. Without a nationality, stateless people are often denied the rights and services that countries normally offer their citizens. Statelessness can therefore be harmful and, in some cases, devastating to the lives of the individuals concerned.(1)

Most situations of statelessness are a direct consequence of discrimination based on ethnicity, religion or gender. In 2014, according to the UN’s Office of the High Commissioner for Refugees (‘UNHCR’), 27 countries denied women the right to pass their nationality on to their children on an equal basis with men, a situation that can create chains of statelessness that span generations. There is also a very real link between statelessness, displacement and regional stability, and new risks of statelessness are emerging with the growing number of major conflicts.(2)

In 2014, the UNHCR also marked the 60th anniversary of the Convention relating to the Status of Stateless Persons (1954) which, along with the Convention on the Reduction of Statelessness (1961), provides the international legal basis for ending statelessness. According to the UNHCR, tackling statelessness still poses a major challenge in the 21st century. At least 10 million people worldwide are currently stateless and a baby is born stateless every 10 minutes: ‘Statelessness can mean a life without education, without medical care or legal employment… a life without the ability to move freely, without prospects or hope.’(3)

The issue of statelessness has also become topical in Australia, in view of the Commonwealth government’s recent amendments to Australian citizenship law and policy which can strip Australian citizenship from dual nationals (or prospective dual nationals) who are in prohibited areas or fighting with terrorist groups. The amendments in the Australian Citizenship Amendment (Allegiance to Australia) Act 2015 (Cth) have attracted criticism for their potential to breach international human rights of the people targeted by the legislation. This legislation exemplifies the tensions that can exist between a State’s exercise of its domestic sovereignty to regulate nationality and protect its citizens, and international law priorities such as protection of an individual’s right to a nationality and the need to avoid statelessness.

Taking a comparative perspective, this paper will also discuss the provisions and operation of recent citizenship and counter-terrorism legislation enacted in other common law jurisdictions, notably Canada and the United Kingdom, which remove citizenship from nationals of those countries on prescribed national security grounds.(4)

The paper will discuss the extent to which the legislation in these jurisdictions operates in accordance with international law regarding human rights and statelessness. In particular, the paper will consider answers to the following questions: Can international law offer States a framework to resolve issues leading to statelessness? How can this be achieved in view of domestic concerns over terrorism and national security challenges?

References:
(1) United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Refugees (‘UNHCR’), Preventing and Reducing Statelessness: The 1961 Convention on the Reduction of Statelessness (UNHCR, 2014) 1-2.
(2) UNHCR, ‘UNHCR announces push to end statelessness by end-2024’ (News & Media statement, 4 November 2014) <http://unhcr.org.au/unhcr/index.php?option=com_content&view=arti...:end-statelessness-2024&catid=35:news-a-media&Itemid=63>.
(3) Ibid.
(4) Strengthening Canadian Citizenship Act 2014 (Canada); British Nationality Act 1981 (UK) and Counter-Terrorism and Security Act 2015 (UK).

There are no files associated with this item.