DOCSLIB.ORG

19 GEO V 1928 No 58 British Nationality and Status Of

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
19 GEO V 1928 No 58 British Nationality and Status Of 19 GEO. V.] British Nationality and Status of [1928, No. 58. 703 Aliens (in New Zealand). New Zealalltl ANALYSIS. Title. M i8cellaneous. 1. Short Title and commencement. 9. Oath of allegiance. 2. Interpretation. 10. Saving the powers of the Gem'ral Assembly to differentiate between different classeR of BRITISH NATIONALITY IN NEW ZEALAND. subjects. Adoption of Part Il of Imperial Act. 11. Records of naturalization. 3. Adoption of Part 11 of Imperial Act. 12. Penalty for false representation or statement. 4. Exercisc in New Zealand of powers conferred by Part 11 of Imperial Act. 5. Persons previously naturalized may receive STATUS OF ALIENS IN NEW ZEALAND. certificates of naturalization under this Act. Capacity to acquire Land. Derlnratory Statement as to olhe?· Provisions of l:l. Capacity of aliens to acquire Jam] in New Imperial Act8. Zealand. 6. Certain provisions of Imperial Acts declared part of law of New Zealand. REGULATIONR. Application of Act to Cook Islands and Western 14. Governor·General may mn.ke regulations for Samoa. purposes of this Act. 7. Naturalization of aliens in Cook Islands and, Western Samoa. ' R. Restricted operation of certain certificates of REPEALS. naturalization granted to residents of I 15. Repeals. Saving of existing certificates. Western Samoa. I Schedules. 1928, No. 58. AN ACT to adopt Part II of the British Nationality and Status of Title. Aliens Act, 1914 (Imperial), to make certain Provisions relating to British Nationality and the Status of Aliens in New Zealand, and also to make Special Provisions with respect to the N aturaliza­ tion of Persons resident in Western Samoa. [Reserved for 11" 8ignificalion of Hi., Majesty·, pleasure thereon.] BE IT ENACTED by the General Assembly of New Zealand in Parliament assembled, and by the authority of the same, as follows :- 1. This Act may be cited as the British Nationality and Status of Short Title and Aliens (in New Zealand) Act, 1928, and shall come into operation on the commencement. day on which His Majesty's assent thereto is notified by the Governor­ General by a Proclamation published in the Gazette, or on such later date (being not later than three months after the date of the publication 704 1928, No. 58.] British Nationality and Status of [19 GEO. V. Aliens (in New Zealand). of the Proclamation as aforesaid) as is specified in that behalf in the Proclamation. Interpretation. 2. In this Act the expression" the Imperial Act" or " the Imperial Of. 12 &. 13 Geo. V, Acts" means the British Nationality and Status of Aliens Act, 1914 c. 44, s. 3 (4) (Imperial), as amended by the British Nationality and Status of Aliens Act, 1918, the British Nationality and Status of Aliens Act, 1922, and any other enactment for the time being in force. BRITISH NATIONALITY IN NEW ZEALAND. Adoption of Part 11 of Imperial Act. Adoption of Part II 3. Part II of the Imperial Act (the said Part being set out in the of Imperial Act. First Schedule hereto) is hereby adopted. Exercise in New 4. (1) Regulations for the purposes of Part II of the Imperial Act, Zealand of powers in its application to New Zealand, may be made by the Governor- conferred by Part TI G I' C il . d . h h . f t' f of Imperial Act. enera ill ounc III accor ance WIt t e prOVISIOnS 0 sec IOn ourteen hereof. All other powers conferred on the Government of New Zealand by the said Part II shall be exercisable by the Minister of Internal Affairs. (2) Any case which, by virtue of sections seven and eight of the Imperial Act in their application to New Zealand, may be referred for inquiry to a "superior Court" in New Zealand, may be so referred to the Supreme Court of New Zealand. Persons previously 5. Any person who has been naturalized in New Zealand before the naturalized may receive certificatps commencement of this Act may apply to the Minister of Internal Affairs of naturalization for a certificate of naturalization under this Act, and the said Minister under this Act. may grant to him a certificate on such terms and conditions as he may Of. 4 &. 5 Geo. V. p. 17, s. 6 think fit. Declaratory Statement as to other Provisions of Imperial Acts. Certain provisions of 6. The several provisions of the Imperial Acts set forth in the Imperial Acts declared part of Ia.w Second Schedule to this Act, in so far as the said provisions are capable of New Zealand. of application in New Zealand, are hereby declared to be part of the law of New Zealand. Application of Act to Cook Islands and Western Samoa. ~aturalization of 7. (1) Subject to the provisions of this section, this Act shall a.l1iensdin CdooWk t apply to the Cook Islands and to Western Samoa in the same manner rs an s an ea ern. II 'f h .. f 11 f N Samoa. III a respects as 1 t ose terrItorIes were or a purposes part 0 ew H123, No. 46, a. 14 Zealand; and the term" New Zealand" as used in this Act shall, both in New Zealand and in the said territories respectively, be construed accordingly as including the Cook Islands and Western Samoa. (2) In the application of this Act to the Cook Islands and Western Samoa- (a) The power to grant certificates of naturalization shall be vested in the Governor-General, and in the case of a person resident in the Cook Islands shall be exercised on the recommenda­ tion of the Minister for the Cook Islands, and in the case of a person resident in Western Samoa shall be exercised on the recommendation of the Minister of External Affairs: 19 GEO. V.] British Nationality and Status of [1928, No. 58. 705 Aliens (in New Zealand). (b) The oath of allegiance shall be taken before a Judge or Com­ missioner of the High Court of the Cook Islands, or a Judge or Commissioner of the High Court of Western Samoa, as the case may require, and every such Judge and Com­ missioner is hereby respectively authorized to administer the said oath accordingly: (c) The powers conferred by section five .of the Imperial Act, in its application to New Zealand, shall be vested in the Governor-General: (d) The powers conferred by sections seven and seven A of the Imperial Act, in its application to New Zealand, shall be exercised only by the Governor-General in Council. 8. (1) Notwithstanding anything to the contrary in paragraph (b) Restricted operation of section two of the Imperial Act, in its application to New Zealand, of certain .ce~ificates . h 11 b di . d h f ifi f of naturalizatIOn It s a not e a con tlOn prece ent to t e grant 0 a cert cate 0 granted to residents naturalization to any Samoan as defined in the Samoa Act, 1921, that of Western Samoa. he has an adequate knowledge of the English language. (2) Where a certificate of naturalization is granted as aforesaid to any Samoan who has not an adequate knowledge of the English language, such certificate shall bear on the face thereof a statement that it has been granted under the special provisions of this section. A certificate so granted shall not confer or impose on the holder thereof the rights or obligations of a British subject elsewhere than in New Zealand. Miscellaneous . 9. The oath of allegiance which, by section two of the Imperial Oath of allegiance. Act, in its application to New Zealand, is required to be taken by persons to whom certificates of naturalization are granted shall be taken before a Magistrate or Justice of the Peace, and every Magistrate and every Justice of the Peace is hereby authorized to administer the said oath to any person whose application for a certificate of naturalization has been approved by the Minister of Internal Affairs. 10. In exercise of the powers of the Legislature of New Zealand Saving the powers ~ec~gnized ~y s~bsection one of sectio:r.t t~enty-six of the Imperial ~ct, ts:~~~n:~al m Its apphcatIOn to New Zealand, It IS hereby expressly prOVIded differentia~ between dIfferent tha t - classes of subjects. (a) Nothing in the Imperial Acts or this Act shall in any manner repeal, limit, or affect the provisions of the Immigration Restriction Act, 1908: (b) Nothing in the Imperial Acts or this Act shall in any manner repeal, limit, or affect the provisions of any Act heretofore passed, or that may hereafter be passed, relating to electoral rights and distinguishing between classes of British subjects in relation to such rights. 11. (1) The Minister of Internal Affairs shall enrol for safe custody Records of as of record a duplicate of all certificates of naturalization issued under naturalization this Act. (2) The said Minister shall cause proper indexes to be made to certificates enrolled by him as aforesaid, and shall permit every person desirous of so doing to inspect the same and make copies thereof on payment of the fee of one shilling for every such inspection. 45 706 1928, No. 58.] British Nationality and Status of [19 GEO. V. Aliens (in New Zealand). (3) Copies of certificates enrolled as aforesaid shall, if certified to be true copies by the said Minister, be admissible in evidence for all purposes. (4) Such fees shall be charged for certified copies as the said Minister prescribc.s. Penalty for false 12. If any person for any of the purposes of this Act knowingly representation 01' statement. makes any false representation or any statement that is false in a 4 & 5 Geo.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Evolution of Australian Citizenship*
    One Hundred Years of (Almost) Solitude: the Evolution of Australian Citizenship* Helen Irving On 1 January 1901, six of the Australasian colonies joined together in one ‘indissoluble federal Commonwealth’, as the words of the Preamble to the Australian Constitution put it. Massive celebrations accompanied the inauguration of the Commonwealth. They were repeated for the opening of the First Federal Parliament four months later, and again, around the new nation, for the tour of the Duke and Duchess of York that followed. The celebrations stretched over the first six months of that year. There were parades, banquets, picnics, sporting competitions, exhibitions and historical re- enactments. Streets were decorated, poems were composed, songs were sung, medals were struck, prisoners were pardoned, and fireworks lit again and again. What was being celebrated? Among the many other achievements of that day, Australians who read their newspapers learned on 1 January 1901, that they had become Australian citizens. It was a rather curious claim to make. There had been an attempt in 1898 to write a definition of citizenship into the Australian Constitution, but it had failed. Although the delegates to the Federal Convention laboured long and hard in their effort to say just what it was to be a citizen—traversing legal and political rights, as well as cultural attributes—the Constitution’s framers could not settle on a definition. * This paper was presented as a lecture in the Department of the Senate Occasional Lecture Series at Parliament House on 22 June 2001. Legally, Australians were British subjects, not citizens. To use the term ‘citizen’ meant going beyond this simple fact.
    [Show full text]
  • Birthright Citizenship and the Alien Citizen
    Fordham Law Review Volume 75 Issue 5 Article 10 2007 Birthright Citizenship and the Alien Citizen Mae M. Ngai Follow this and additional works at: https://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/flr Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation Mae M. Ngai, Birthright Citizenship and the Alien Citizen, 75 Fordham L. Rev. 2521 (2007). Available at: https://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/flr/vol75/iss5/10 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by FLASH: The Fordham Law Archive of Scholarship and History. It has been accepted for inclusion in Fordham Law Review by an authorized editor of FLASH: The Fordham Law Archive of Scholarship and History. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Birthright Citizenship and the Alien Citizen Cover Page Footnote Professor of History, Columbia University. This article is available in Fordham Law Review: https://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/flr/vol75/iss5/10 BIRTHRIGHT CITIZENSHIP AND THE ALIEN CITIZEN Mae M. Ngai* The alien citizen is an American citizen by virtue of her birth in the United States but whose citizenship is suspect, if not denied, on account of the racialized identity of her immigrant ancestry. In this construction, the foreignness of non-European peoples is deemed unalterable, making nationality a kind of racial trait. Alienage, then, becomes a permanent condition, passed from generation to generation, adhering even to the native-born citizen. Qualifiers like "accidental" citizen,1 "presumed" citizen,2 or even "terrorist" citizen3 have been used in political and legal arguments to denigrate, compromise, and nullify the U.S. citizenship of "unassimilable" Chinese, "enemy-race" Japanese, Mexican .aA X4 -1,;- otreit." "illegal aliens," 1.1 -U1 .-O-..
    [Show full text]
  • Alien Removals and Returns: Overview and Trends
    Alien Removals and Returns: Overview and Trends Updated February 3, 2015 Congressional Research Service https://crsreports.congress.gov R43892 Alien Removals and Returns: Overview and Trends Summary The ability to remove foreign nationals (aliens) who violate U.S. immigration law is central to the immigration enforcement system. Some lawful migrants violate the terms of their admittance, and some aliens enter the United States illegally, despite U.S. immigration laws and enforcement. In 2012, there were an estimated 11.4 million resident unauthorized aliens; estimates of other removable aliens, such as lawful permanent residents who commit crimes, are elusive. With total repatriations of over 600,000 people in FY2013—including about 440,000 formal removals—the removal and return of such aliens have become important policy issues for Congress, and key issues in recent debates about immigration reform. The Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) provides broad authority to the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and the Department of Justice (DOJ) to remove certain foreign nationals from the United States, including unauthorized aliens (i.e., foreign nationals who enter without inspection, aliens who enter with fraudulent documents, and aliens who enter legally but overstay the terms of their temporary visas) and lawfully present foreign nationals who commit certain acts that make them removable. Any foreign national found to be inadmissible or deportable under the grounds specified in the INA may be ordered removed. The INA describes procedures for making and reviewing such a determination, and specifies conditions under which certain grounds of removal may be waived. DHS officials may exercise certain forms of discretion in pursuing removal orders, and certain removable aliens may be eligible for permanent or temporary relief from removal.
    [Show full text]
  • Aliens (Consolidation) Act
    K:\Flygtningeministeriet\2002\bekg\510103\510103.fm 31-10-02 10:7 k03 pz Consolidation Act No. 608 of 17 July 2002 of the Danish Ministry of Refugee, Immigration and Integration Affairs Aliens (Consolidation) Act The following is a consolidation of the Aliens Act, cf. Consolidation Act No. 711 of 1 August 2001, with the amendments following from Act No. 134 of 20 March 20021), section 2 of Act No. 193 of 5 April 2002, Act No. 362 of 6 June 2002, section 1 of Act No. 365 of 6 June 2002 and Act No. 367 of 6 June 20022). Parts of the amendments following from Act No. 134 of 20 March 2002 and Act No. 367 of 6 June 2002 have not been incorporated into this Consolidation Act, as the amendments have not yet entered into force. The time of their entering into force will be determined by the Minister, cf. section 2 of the Acts. Part I EC rules only to the extent that these limitations are compatible with those rules. Aliens' entry into and stay in Denmark (4) The Minister for Refugee, Immigration and 1. Nationals of Finland, Iceland, Norway, and Integration Affairs lays down more detailed pro- Sweden may enter and stay in Denmark without visions on the implementation of the rules of the special permission. European Community on visa exemption and on 2. (1) Aliens who are nationals of a country abolition of entry and residence restrictions in which is a member of the European Community connection with the free movement of workers, or comprised by the Agreement on the European freedom of establishment and freedom to pro- Economic Area may enter and stay in Denmark vide and receive services, etc.
    [Show full text]
  • British Nationality Act 1981
    Status: This version of this Act contains provisions that are prospective. Changes to legislation: There are outstanding changes not yet made by the legislation.gov.uk editorial team to British Nationality Act 1981. Any changes that have already been made by the team appear in the content and are referenced with annotations. (See end of Document for details) British Nationality Act 1981 1981 CHAPTER 61 An Act to make fresh provision about citizenship and nationality, and to amend the Immigration Act 1971 as regards the right of abode in the United Kingdom. [30th October 1981] Annotations: Modifications etc. (not altering text) C1 Act extended by British Nationality (Falkland Islands) Act 1983 (c. 6, SIF 87), s. 3(1); restricted by British Nationality (Falkland Islands) Act 1983 (c. 6, SIF 87), s. 3(2); amended by S.I. 1983/1699, art. 2(1) and amended by British Nationality (Hong Kong) Act 1990 (c. 34, SIF 87), s. 2(1) C2 Act modified: (18.7.1996) by 1996 c. 41, s. 2(1); (19.3.1997) by 1997 c. 20, s. 2(1) C3 Act applied (19.3.1997) by 1997 c. 20, s. 1(8) C4 Act amended (2.10.2000) by S.I. 2000/2326, art. 8 C5 Act modified (21.5.2002) by British Overseas Territories Act 2002 (c. 8), s. 3(3); S.I. 2002/1252, art. 2 C6 Act modified (21.5.2002) by British Overseas Territories Act 2002 (c. 8), s. 6(2); S.I. 2002/1252, art. 2 Act modified (21.5.2002) by British Overseas Territories Act 2002 (c.
    [Show full text]
  • 20190619135814870 18-725 Barton Opp.Pdf
    No. 18-725 In the Supreme Court of the United States ANDRE MARTELLO BARTON, PETITIONER v. WILLIAM P. BARR, ATTORNEY GENERAL ON PETITION FOR A WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT BRIEF FOR THE RESPONDENT IN OPPOSITION NOEL J. FRANCISCO Solicitor General Counsel of Record JOSEPH H. HUNT Assistant Attorney General DONALD E. KEENER JOHN W. BLAKELEY TIMOTHY G. HAYES Attorneys Department of Justice Washington, D.C. 20530-0001 [email protected] (202) 514-2217 QUESTION PRESENTED Whether the stop-time rule, which governs the cal- culation of an alien’s period of continuous residence in the United States for purposes of eligibility for cancel- lation of removal, may be triggered by an offense that “renders the alien inadmissible,” 8 U.S.C. 1229b(d)(1)(B), when the alien is a lawful permanent resident who is not seeking admission. (I) TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Opinions below .............................................................................. 1 Jurisdiction .................................................................................... 1 Statement ...................................................................................... 1 Argument ....................................................................................... 6 Conclusion ................................................................................... 14 TABLE OF AUTHORITIES Cases: Ardon v. Attorney Gen. of U.S., 449 Fed. Appx. 116 (3d Cir. 2011) ......................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Immigration Law and the Myth of Comprehensive Registration
    Immigration Law and the Myth of Comprehensive Registration Nancy Morawetz†* and Natasha Fernández-Silber** This Article identifies an insidious misconception in immigration law and policy: the myth of comprehensive registration. According to this myth — proponents of which include members of the Supreme Court, federal and state officials, and commentators on both sides of the immigration federalism debate — there exists a comprehensive federal alien registration system; this scheme obligates all non-citizens in the United States to register and carry registration cards at all times, or else face criminal sanction. In truth, no such system exists today, nor has one ever existed in American history. Yet, federal agencies like U.S. Border Patrol refer to such a system to justify arrests and increase enforcement statistics; the Department of Justice points to the same mythic system to argue statutory preemption of state immigration laws (rather than confront the discriminatory purpose and effect of those laws); and, states trot it out in an attempt to turn civil immigration offenses into criminal infractions. Although this legal fiction is convenient for a variety of disparate political institutions, it is far from convenient for those who face wrongful arrest and detention based on nothing more than failure to carry proof of status. Individuals in states with aggressive “show me your papers” immigration laws or under the presence of U.S. Border Patrol are particularly at risk. In an effort to dispel this dangerous misconception, this Article reviews the history of America’s experimentation with registration laws and the † Copyright © 2014 Nancy Morawetz and Natasha Fernández-Silber.
    [Show full text]
  • Alienage Jurisdiction and “Stateless” Persons and Corporations After Traffic Stream
    PUTTING THE “ALIEN” BACK INTO ALIENAGE JURISDICTION: ALIENAGE JURISDICTION AND “STATELESS” PERSONS AND CORPORATIONS AFTER TRAFFIC STREAM Robert Bernheim∗ INTRODUCTION In 1994, the representatives for nine Palestinians killed by Israeli dispersion of CS gas (teargas) brought a wrongful death suit against the American manufacturer of the gas in a federal district court.1 However, Judge William L. Standish dismissed the case for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction.2 The problem was that the case was based on alienage diversity jurisdiction, but the Palestinian plaintiffs were neither citizens nor subjects of any recognized state.3 This disturbing example is not an isolated jurisdictional fluke. Many companies have not been able to take advantage of U.S. federal courts because they are based out of foreign dependencies of other nations.4 Alternatively, American plaintiffs have occasionally been frustrated in their attempts to hold stateless parties accountable.5 The analysis of the law in this area is limited and unclear, and Abu-Zeineh was perfectly positioned to expose cracks in the system. Resolution of the ambiguities and contradictions in this area would streamline private international law practice, alleviate unfairness to often marginalized groups, and support the welfare and commerce of the United States. ∗ J.D. Candidate, University of Arizona James E. Rogers College of Law, 2006. I want to thank Michael Catlett, Roopali Desai, Joe Lin, Tom Raine, and Lindsay St. John for their valuable suggestions. Special thanks also go to Ann Redd and Emily Gust for understanding the madness. 1. Abu-Zeineh v. Fed. Labs., Inc., 975 F. Supp. 774 (W.D.
    [Show full text]
  • U.S. Naturalization Policy
    U.S. Naturalization Policy Updated May 3, 2021 Congressional Research Service https://crsreports.congress.gov R43366 U.S. Naturalization Policy Summary Naturalization is the process that grants U.S. citizenship to lawful permanent residents (LPRs) who fulfill requirements established by Congress and enumerated in the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA). In general, U.S. immigration policy gives all LPRs the opportunity to naturalize, and doing so is voluntary. To qualify for citizenship, LPRs in most cases must have resided continuously in the United States for five years, show they possess good moral character, demonstrate English language ability, and pass a U.S. government and history examination, which is part of their naturalization interview. The INA waives some of these requirements for applicants over age 50 with 20 years of U.S. residency, those with mental or physical disabilities, and those who have served in the U.S. military. Naturalization is often viewed as a milestone for immigrants and a measure of their civic and socioeconomic integration to the United States. Naturalized immigrants gain important benefits, including the right to vote, security from deportation in most cases, access to certain public-sector jobs, and the ability to travel with a U.S. passport. U.S. citizens are also advantaged over LPRs for sponsoring relatives to immigrate to the United States. During the past three decades, the number of LPRs who submitted naturalization applications has varied over time, ranging from a low of about 207,000 applications in FY1991 to a high of 1.4 million in FY1997. In FY2020, 967,755 LPRs submitted naturalization applications.
    [Show full text]
  • The California Alien Land Law and the Fourteenth Amendment
    19471 The California Alien Land Law and the Fourteenth Amendment Edwin E. Ferguson* T HEPAST few years have seen a surge of, activity by California law-enforcement officers, aided by new state legislation and aug- mented appropriations, in the investigation of possible violations of the alien land law and the institution of escheat proceedings. By the summer of 1945 approximately thirty escheat actions had been begun, judgments in favor of the state had been entered in four of them, and out-of-court settlements of $100,000 and $25,000, respectively, had been effected in two others.' By the spring of 1946 some fifty actions were pending. All of these suits involved agricultural lands and were directed against persons of Japanese ancestry.2 Additional suits have since been filed.' The alien land law, first enacted in 1913, denies to aliens ineligi- ble for citizenship the right to own, lease, or otherwise enjoy land, except to the extent provided by treaty.4 Despite the manifest dis- crimination against one class of aliens and the deprivation of prop- erty rights involved, the United States Supreme Court in 1923 upheld the law, concluding that it did not violate the equal protection and due process guaranties of the Fourteenth Amendment. 5 The new wave of escheat actions has resulted in a new test of the law. Late in 1946, in an appeal from a judgment of escheat which again raised the equal protection and due process issues, the California supreme court re- affirmed the constitutionality of the law in People v. Oyama,6 relying upon the rationale provided by the 1923 decisions.
    [Show full text]
  • UK and Colonies 1. General 1.1 Before 1 January 1949
    UK and Colonies 1. General 1.1 Before 1 January 1949, the principal form of nationality was British subject status, which was obtained by virtue of a connection with a place within the Crown's dominions. On and after this date, the main form of nationality was citizenship of the UK and Colonies, which was obtained by virtue of a connection with a place within the UK and Colonies. 2. Meaning of the expression 2.1 On 1 January 1949, all the territories within the Crown's dominions came within the UK and Colonies except for the Dominions of Canada, Australia, New Zealand, South Africa, Newfoundland, India, Pakistan and Ceylon (see "DOMINIONS") and Southern Rhodesia, which were identified by s.1(3) of the BNA 1948 as independent Commonwealth countries. Section 32(1) of the 1948 Act defined "colony" as excluding any such country. Also excluded from the UK and Colonies was Southern Ireland, although it was not an independent Commonwealth country. 2.2 For the purposes of the BNA 1948, the UK included Northern Ireland and, as of 10 February 1972, the Island of Rockall, but excluded the Channel Islands and Isle of Man which, under s.32(1), were colonies. 2.3 The significance of a territory which came within the UK and Colonies was, of course, that by virtue of a connection with such a territory a person could become a CUKC. Persons who, prior to 1 January 1949, had become British subjects by birth, naturalisation, annexation or descent as a result of a connection with a territory which, on that date, came within the UK and Colonies were automatically re- classified as CUKCs (s.12(1)-(2)).
    [Show full text]
  • 120 Uth May, 1
    THIS DOCUMENT IS THE PROPERTY OF HIS BRIT ANISIC MAJESTY'3 GOVERNMENT) jLIJLJLJLI COPY NO. ^0 CP. (h.8) 120 Uth May, 1 9I48. CABINET BRITISH NATIONALITY BILL Memorandum by the Home Secretary and the Secretary of State for Commonwealth. Relations This Bill, which is awaiting Second Reading in the House of Lords, provides that all persons who are citizens of the United Kingdom and Colonies, or citizens of Canada, Australia, New Zealand, South Africa, Newfoundland, India, Pakistan, Southern Rhodesia, and Ceylon, shall, by virtue of their respective citizenships, be British subjects. It also provides that citizens of Eire, although not British subjects, shall, in the United Kingdom and Colonies, be in a position under existing legislation equivalent to that of British subjects. Inoha have asked that in place of the' term "British subjects1 ', which is in their view open to misunderstanding, there should be substituted some term such as "Commonwealth citizens" or "citizens of the Commonwealth". 2. The people of many countries of the Commonwealth are proud to be described as British subjects, and could not be asked to abandon this title. To the people, however, of certain other Commonwealth countries, the term "British subject" has an entirely different significance and seems to indicate the continued domination of them by the inhabitants of the British Isles. There are obvious objections to compelling the countries where the term "British subject" is unwelcome to accept this label as a condition of remaining within the Commonwealth. The Bill recognises the desire of the people of Eire to rid themselves of the label "British subject", and it seems right to give the people of other Commonwealth countries liberty to describe themselves, if they so wish, by some term other than "British subject".
    [Show full text]