DOCSLIB.ORG

Citizenship Removal Resulting in Statelessness

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Citizenship Removal Resulting in Statelessness CITIZENSHIP REMOVAL RESULTING IN STATELESSNESS FIRST REPORT OF THE INDEPENDENT REVIEWER ON THE OPERATION OF THE POWER TO REMOVE CITIZENSHIP OBTAINED BY NATURALISATION FROM PERSONS WHO HAVE NO OTHER CITIZENSHIP by DAVID ANDERSON Q.C. Independent Reviewer of Terrorism Legislation APRIL 2016 CITIZENSHIP REMOVAL RESULTING IN STATELESSNESS FIRST REPORT OF THE INDEPENDENT REVIEWER ON THE OPERATION OF THE POWER TO REMOVE CITIZENSHIP OBTAINED BY NATURALISATION FROM PERSONS WHO HAVE NO OTHER CITIZENSHIP by DAVID ANDERSON Q.C. Independent Reviewer of Terrorism Legislation Presented to Parliament pursuant to section 40B(5) of the British Nationality Act 1981 April 2016 © David Anderson 2016 The text of this document (this excludes, where present, the Royal Arms and all departmental or agency logos) may be reproduced free of charge in any format or medium provided that it is reproduced accurately and not in a misleading context. The material must be acknowledged as David Anderson copyright and the document title specified. Where third party material has been identified, permission from the respective copyright holder must be sought. Any enquiries regarding this publication should be sent to the Independent Reviewer at [email protected] or by post to David Anderson Q.C. at Brick Court Chambers, 7-8 Essex Street, London WC2R 3LD. This publication is available at http://terrorismlegislationreviewer.independent.gov.uk and www.gov.uk/government/publications Print ISBN 9781474131131 Web ISBN 9781474131148 Printed in the UK by the Williams Lea Group on behalf of the Controller of Her Majesty’s Stationery Office ID 11041601 04/16 Printed on paper containing 75% recycled fibre content minimum. CONTENTS page 1. INTRODUCTION 3 2. EVOLUTION OF THE POWER 5 3. ISSUES RELATING TO THE POWER 11 4. CONCLUSION 17 1 2 1. INTRODUCTION The power under review 1.1. By the Immigration Act 2014 [IA 2014], Parliament conferred upon the Secretary of State the power under review: that is, a power to deprive a person of British citizenship resulting from naturalisation, in circumstances where the consequence of that order is to render the person stateless.1 1.2. The power under review may be exercised only if: (a) the Secretary of State is satisfied that the deprivation is conducive to the public good because the person, when a British citizen, “has conducted him or herself in a manner which is seriously prejudicial to the vital interests of the United Kingdom” or associated territories; and (b) the Secretary of State has “reasonable grounds for believing that the person is able, under the law of a country or territory outside the United Kingdom, to become a national of such country or territory”.2 1.3. Outside the scope of this review are the powers that enable: (a) dual nationals to be deprived of their British citizenship (however acquired), if the Secretary of State is satisfied that deprivation is conducive to the public good;3 and (b) single or dual nationals to be deprived of citizenship resulting from registration or naturalisation when the Secretary of State is satisfied that it was obtained by means of fraud, false representation or concealment of a material fact.4 1.4. So the uniqueness of the power under review arises: (a) neither from the mere fact that deprivation of citizenship is exercisable on “conducive to the public good” grounds, (b) nor from the mere fact that its exercise makes people stateless. Rather, the distinctive nature of the power lies in its combination of those factors. 1 IA 2014 s66, inserting a new s40(4A) into the British Nationality Act 1981 [BNA 1981]. 2 This condition was inserted during the parliamentary passage of the Bill: the original intention was to confer a power to make persons stateless, regardless of their prospects of acquiring citizenship elsewhere. See 2.21(c) below. 3 BNA 1981 s40(2), as substituted by Immigration Asylum and Nationality Act 2006 ss 56(1), 62. Prior to that date, higher or additional thresholds had to be surmounted: 2.5 and 2.10 below. 4 BNA 1981 s40(3). 3 This review 1.5. The power under review is comparable to one that existed in the UK prior to April 2003 (2.4-2.8 below), but has relatively few international parallels (3.9 below). Its parliamentary passage was sufficiently controversial that provision was made for the regular review of its operation. 1.6. Reviews are to take place as follows: (a) The first review is to be completed as soon as practicable after the end of the first year in which the power was in force, and its outcome communicated to the Home Secretary in a report which she is obliged to lay before each House of Parliament.5 (b) Subsequent reviews are to be conducted, and reports produced, at three-year intervals.6 1.7. I am a barrister (Queen’s Counsel) in independent practice, serving on a part- time basis as Independent Reviewer of Terrorism Legislation.7 James Brokenshire MP, Minister of State for Immigration, invited me to conduct the first statutory review in July 2015. There is no statutory requirement that this or any subsequent review be conducted by the Independent Reviewer of Terrorism Legislation, though it is certainly necessary that any reviewer should have full security clearance. 1.8. This report is the outcome of the first statutory review. It covers the period 30 July 2014 to 29 July 2015. Operation of the power 1.9. The power under review was not exercised during the period under review, and indeed had still not been exercised as of April 2016, when this report went to print. There is therefore no concrete action to review. 1.10. It may however be useful for the evolution of the power under review to be summarised, and for some of the likely legal and practical issues concerning its operation to be identified in outline. That is done in chapters 2 and 3, before some short conclusory comments in chapter 4. 5 Immigration Act 2014 s66(3), inserting a new s40(4B) into the British Nationality Act 1981. 6 British Nationality Act 1981 s40(4B)(1)(b). 7 Previous reports, and other publications explaining the role of the Independent Reviewer, are freely available from the website https://terrorismlegislationreviewer.independent.gov.uk. The Independent Reviewer may also be followed on twitter @terrorwatchdog. 4 2. EVOLUTION OF THE POWER International treaties 2.1. Two principal international Conventions seek to avoid incidents of statelessness. They are: (a) The 1961 UN Convention on the Reduction of Statelessness [the 1961 Convention]; and (b) The Council of Europe’s 1997 European Convention on Nationality [the 1997 Convention]. 2.2. In the view of the Government, neither of those Conventions prevents the United Kingdom from using the power under review to render a person stateless. That is, in summary, because: (a) Though the United Kingdom ratified the 1961 Convention, it was entitled according to the terms of that Convention to retain a pre-existing domestic law power to deprive a person of their nationality if the person had “conducted himself in a manner seriously prejudicial to the vital interests of the state”.8 Such a power is said to have existed at the time under the British Nationality Act 1948 [BNA 1948].9 (b) Though the 1997 Convention absolutely prohibited deprivation resulting in statelessness, save where nationality had been obtained by misrepresentation or fraud,10 it was never ratified by the United Kingdom.11 2.3. Further background is set out in a recent judgment of the UK Supreme Court12 and in a useful House of Commons Library Note, the contents of which are not elaborated here.13 8 1961 Convention, Article 8(3)(a)(ii). The UK ratified the Convention in March 1966 with a reservation to Article 8. 9 BNA 1948, s20. 10 1997 Convention, Article 7(3). 11 Though the Government intended to ratify it in 2002, when UK law was changed to bring it into line with the 1997 Convention: 2.11 below. 12 Secretary of State for the Home Department v Al-Jedda [2013] UKSC 62, paras 15-22. 13 House of Commons Library (Melanie Gower), “Deprivation of British citizenship and withdrawal of passport facilities”, Standard Note SN/HA/6820, 30 January 2015. 5 UK law and practice 1983-2003 2.4. The current basis of nationality law in the UK is the British Nationality Act 1981 [BNA 1981], in force since 1 January 1983. 2.5. For 20 years after that, BNA 1981 stated that the Secretary of State could by order deprive of citizenship a person who had acquired British citizenship14 by registration or naturalisation, if satisfied that: (a) registration or naturalisation had been obtained by fraud, false representation or concealment of material fact: s40(1); (b) the person had shown disloyalty of disaffection towards Her Majesty by act or speech: s40(3)(a); (c) the person had unlawfully traded or communicated with an enemy during any war in which Her Majesty was engaged or been engaged in or associated with any business carried out to assist an enemy in that war: s40(3)(b); or (d) the person had been sentenced in any country to twelve months or more imprisonment within five years of the date of naturalisation or registration and the person would not become stateless: s40(3)(c), s40(5)(b). In each case, the Secretary of State could deprive a person of their British citizenship only if satisfied that it was not conducive to the public good that that person should continue to be a British citizen. 2.6. These powers reflected those previously in place under the British Nationality Act 1948 [BNA 1948].
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Children's Right to a Nationality
    OPEN SOCIETY JUSTICE INITIATIVE Children’s right to a nationality Statelessness affects more than 12 million people around the world, among whom the most vulnerable are children. The Open Society Justice Initiative estimates that as many as 5 million may be minors. The consequences of lack of nationality are numerous and severe. Many stateless children grow up in extreme poverty and are denied basic rights and services such as access to education and health care. Stateless children‟s lack of identity documentation limits their freedom of movement. They are subject to arbitrary deportations and prolonged detentions, are vulnerable to social exclusion, trafficking and exploitation—including child labor. Despite its importance, children‟s right to a nationality rarely gets the urgent attention it needs. Children’s right to nationality The right to a nationality is protected under At the very least, the right to acquire a nationality under international law. The Universal Declaration of Human the CRC should be understood to mean that children Rights provides a general right to nationality under have a right to nationality in their country of birth if article 15. The international human rights treaties— they do not acquire another nationality from birth—in including the Convention on the Rights of the Child other words, if they would otherwise be stateless. In (CRC) and the International Covenant on Civil and fact, this particular principle is recognized in regional Political Rights (ICCPR)—as well as the Convention on systems as well as in the Convention on the Reduction the Reduction of Statelessness, provide particular norms of Statelessness.
    [Show full text]
  • The Nationality Law of the People's Republic of China and the Overseas Chinese in Hong Kong, Macao and Southeast Asia
    NYLS Journal of International and Comparative Law Volume 5 Article 6 Number 2 Volume 5, Numbers 2 & 3, 1984 1984 The aN tionality Law of the People's Republic of China and the Overseas Chinese in Hong Kong, Macao and Southeast Asia Tung-Pi Chen Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.nyls.edu/ journal_of_international_and_comparative_law Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation Chen, Tung-Pi (1984) "The aN tionality Law of the People's Republic of China and the Overseas Chinese in Hong Kong, Macao and Southeast Asia," NYLS Journal of International and Comparative Law: Vol. 5 : No. 2 , Article 6. Available at: https://digitalcommons.nyls.edu/journal_of_international_and_comparative_law/vol5/iss2/6 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by DigitalCommons@NYLS. It has been accepted for inclusion in NYLS Journal of International and Comparative Law by an authorized editor of DigitalCommons@NYLS. THE NATIONALITY LAW OF THE PEOPLE'S REPUBLIC OF CHINA AND THE OVERSEAS CHINESE IN HONG KONG, MACAO AND SOUTHEAST ASIA TUNG-PI CHEN* INTRODUCTION After thirty years of existence, the Government of the People's Re- public of China (PRC) enacted the long-awaited Nationality Law in 1980.1 Based on the PRC Government's enduring principle of racial and sexual equality, the new law is designed to reduce dual nationality and statelessness by combining the principles of jus sanguinis and jus soli to determine nationality at birth. The need for a Chinese national- ity law had long been recognized, but it was not until the adoption of the "open door" policy in 1978 after the downfall of the "Gang of Four," as well as the institution of codification efforts, that the urgency of the task was recognized.
    [Show full text]
  • Mr Al-Jedda, Deprivation of Citizenship, and International Law
    Mr Al-Jedda, Deprivation of Citizenship, and International Law Guy S. Goodwin-Gill1 Revised draft of a paper presented at a Seminar at Middlesex University on 14 February 2014 1. The Background in Brief Mr Al-Jedda was a refugee from Iraq. He was granted asylum in the United Kingdom and duly acquired British citizenship by naturalisation; as a consequence, he lost his Iraqi citizenship by operation of law. During the course of the war with Iraq, he was detained there and held by the British military on security grounds. He was released in December 2006, shortly after the Secretary of State made an order purporting to deprive him of his British citizenship. He appealed to the Special Immigration Appeals Commission in 2008, where argument focused on, among other issues, whether Occupying Powers are competent to legislate on nationality, and on the meaning and scope of various legal instruments, including the Transitional Administrative Law (TAL) decreed by the Coalition Provisional Authority and the 2006 Iraqi Nationality Law. SIAC rejected his appeal, finding that he was an Iraqi citizen. This was overturned by the Court of Appeal, which referred the matter back to SIAC. SIAC again found against Mr Al-Jedda, but was again overruled by the Court of Appeal which held that he had automatically lost Iraqi citizenship on acquiring British citizenship, and that he had not automatically regained it either under the TAL or the 2006 Law. Consequently, he could not lawfully be deprived of his British citizenship, as this would render him stateless. The Secretary of State appealed to the Supreme Court, arguing that under section 40 of the British Nationality Act, she could be ‘satisfied’ that the making of a deprivation order would not render the individual concerned stateless if there was another nationality ‘option’, for example, if that person ‘could’ apply elsewhere, and ‘would be’ granted citizenship.
    [Show full text]
  • Who Is Stateless and Why?
    Who is stateless and why?: Exploring how the UN and the international community are addressing statelessness by comparing two case studies of Syrian refugees living in Lebanon and Jordan. Jillian H. Pflederer TC 660H Plan II Honors Program The University of Texas at Austin April 9th, 2019 __________________________________ Dr. Ruth Wasem Clinical Professor at the LBJ School of Public Affairs Supervising Professor __________________________________ Robert M. Chesney Associate Dean of Academic Affairs at the University of Texas School of Law Second Reader 1 Abstract: ​ Author: Jillian H. Pflederer Title: Who is stateless and why?: Exploring how the UN and the international community are addressing statelessness by comparing two case studies of Syrian refugees living in Lebanon and Jordan. Supervising Professor: Dr. Ruth Wasem This thesis will explore how the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) is addressing statelessness as an international crisis and their #IBelong campaign to eradicate statelessness by 2024. Next, it will define what statelessness is and how someone is determined to be stateless concerning the recommendations of UNHCR and international humanitarian law. Finally, it will focus on two case studies of how statelessness is affecting Jordan and Lebanon. The phenomenon of statelessness is not new. However, since the beginning of the Syrian Civil War, statelessness has become prominent among Syrian refugees living in Jordan and Lebanon. Both countries have strict citizenship laws which rule nationality can only pass on to a child through the father. Refugee children born to families with a Syrian father or fathers who died in the conflict are left without a nationality. Many children who fled Syria lack birth certificates and others who are born in refugee camps lack a claim to nationality.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 UN Key Messages on Statelessness the Way Forward
    UN Key Messages on Statelessness The way forward: stronger UN advocacy ahead of a 2019 High-Level Event on Ending Statelessness The problem of statelessness affects millions of people worldwide, with devastating consequences that deprive them of legal rights or basic services, leaving them politically and economically marginalized, discriminated against, and particularly vulnerable to exploitation and abuse. The conditions causing statelessness can also give rise to large-scale violence and displacement, as the mass exodus of Rohingya refugees from Myanmar to Bangladesh has demonstrated. An inclusive and just 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development that truly leaves no one behind must include stateless persons and those who are at risk of statelessness. In order to take the UN’s experience in addressing statelessness to scale across the UN system, the Secretary- General has updated his Guidance Note and issued a set of Key Messages (below) for UN entities to take joint and decisive action. Achievements made by States in addressing statelessness will be showcased at an October 2019 high-level event in Geneva where States will be asked to pledge concrete actions that will lead to substantial results by 2024.1 UN entities are asked to advocate with States toward tangible progress and firm pledges. This advocacy should include coordinated UNCT efforts at the field level as well as a strong Headquarters voice, drawing on the messages below. Key Messages (General) ➢ Ending statelessness worldwide is an ambitious but achievable goal with strong momentum behind it. UNHCR has launched a Campaign to End Statelessness by 2024 (#IBelong Campaign), and with UNICEF, has formed a Coalition on Every Child’s Right to a Nationality.
    [Show full text]
  • Standing Committee on Citizenship and Immigration Sixth Floor, 131 Queen Street House of Commons Ottawa on K1A 0A6 Canada
    Standing Committee on Citizenship and Immigration Sixth Floor, 131 Queen Street House of Commons Ottawa ON K1A 0A6 Canada April 13, 2016 Re: Bill C-6 and Amendments related to Statelessness Dear, Standing Committee on Citizenship and Immigration The Canadian Centre on Statelessness requests that the Standing Committee on Citizenship and Immigration take the opportunity to consider the perspective of the stateless community in Canada as it assesses Bill C-6. Canada’s Citizenship Act presents several challenges with respect to statelessness and stateless persons in Canada in terms of discrimination and access to justice. International law holds that a person is deemed stateless if no state considers her or him to be a citizen under the “operation of its law”. This means a stateless person does not have a nationality or legal identity and lives without basic human rights. The lived reality of statelessness, or not being a citizen of any country, is often described as a life in the shadows and without hope. Statelessness affects an estimated 10 million people worldwide. Stateless people may be refugees, or they may not. Statelessness can occur in myriad of ways. They may have lost their citizenship when the country they were born in was in conflict. Women are disproportionately affected as many lose their citizenship when they marry a foreigner. Statelessness can occur because of ethnic discrimination against minority groups in nationality legislation, birth registration laws, and conflicting laws between states. In Canada, statelessness can occur in two ways: one is in the context of migration which includes those who are stateless when they arrive in Canada, and those who become stateless after they arrive in Canada.
    [Show full text]
  • Migrants Resource Centre, University of Liverpool Law Clinic, European Network on Statelessness, and Institute on Statelessness and Inclusion
    Migrants Resource Centre, University of Liverpool Law Clinic, European Network on Statelessness, and Institute on Statelessness and Inclusion Joint Submission to the Human Rights Council at the 27th Session of the Universal Periodic Review United Kingdom Introduction 1. Migrants Resource Centre, the European Network on Statelessness, the Institute on Statelessness and Inclusion, and the University of Liverpool Law Clinic make this submission to the Universal Periodic Review (UPR) in relation to statelessness, access to nationality and the right to liberty and respect for human rights of stateless persons in the United Kingdom. This joint submission draws on the combined expertise of the submitting organisations in the UK and internationally. 2. Migrants Resource Centre (MRC) is a non-profit organisation founded in 1984 which hosts Asylum Aid and the Project for the Registration of Children as British Citizens (PRCBC). Asylum Aid provides free legal representation to asylum seekers and stateless persons; undertakes related policy work, advocacy and education; and played a key role in researching statelessness1 and pressuring the UK Government to introduce a statelessness determination procedure. PRCBC provides legal advice and assistance and conducts research and education relating to the registration of children as British citizens. 3. The Liverpool Law Clinic is part of the School of Law and Social Justice, University of Liverpool. It is staffed by practising lawyers who, since 2013, advise and represent people in the UK’s statelessness determination procedure. It has collaborated with UNHCR2 and met with Home Office officials to press for changes to practice and policy. The Clinic and the Immigration Law Practitioners’ Association are publishing a Best Practice Guide relating to statelessness applications in the UK.3 4.
    [Show full text]
  • Stateless Palestinians by Abbas Shiblak
    8 PALESTINIAN DISPLACEMENT FMR 26 Stateless Palestinians by Abbas Shiblak Palestinians are the largest stateless community country (Israel) to host states. Two in the world. Statelessness has dominated and main principles – set out in an Arab League protocol signed in Casablanca shaped the lives of four generations of Palestinian in 19651 – have determined the refugees since their exodus in 1948. treatment of Palestinian refugees in host Arab states: granting Palestinian One of the main objectives of the non-Jewish population to return to refugees full citizenship rights Zionist scheme in Palestine was their homes while endorsing the right – but denying them naturalisation eradication of Palestine from the of any Jew – regardless of place of – and issuing them with Refugee map, both as a political entity and origin – to unrestricted immigration Travel Documents (RTD) in order a basis of nationality. Today more and automatic citizenship. to maintain their refugee status. than half of the eight million or so Palestinians are considered to be Similar policies were pursued The pan-Arab national brotherhood de jure stateless persons. These fall following occupation of the of the 1950s and 1960s has faded broadly into three categories: West Bank in 1967. In defiance of away, to be replaced by a self-centred international law, Israel considers agenda of fragmented, sub-national n holders of the ‘Refugee Travel all Palestinians inhabitants of the states and narrow interests. Syria Document’ (RTD) issued by occupied Palestinian territory is the only country that upholds its Syria, Lebanon, Egypt, Iraq and (OPT) as non-citizens and foreign commitment. Some states, including some other Arab countries residents.
    [Show full text]
  • Stateless Individuals
    Human Rights Council Márton Levente Sipos and Tessel Hopmans Research Report The Question of: Stateless individuals Research Report Leiden Model United Nations 2018 ~ fresh ideas, new solutions ~ Introduction Nowadays approximately 10 million people around the world are lacking/have been denied a nationality, resulting in them not being able to exercise their basic human rights, like attending schools, seeing a doctor or working. Stateless people lack the right to get married or to travel freely (sometimes even within the country). They are living in constant fear and they face enormous barriers throughout their lives, only because they became the victims of bureaucracy. Often governments use statelessness as a tool to deal with certain ethnic or religious groups. If these ethnic groups lack legal nationality, then they are practically trapped in the region where they are in constant danger. A great example would be the migrants of Burkinabé (approx. 700 000 people) descent in Cote d'Ivoire, who did not get Ivorian nationality after the country’s independence from France in 1960. We must not forget that stateless individuals are people as well, especially if we consider the very much existent workforce vacuum present. Without properly addressing this issue the number of people without a nationality will continue to grow and it will become gradually harder to find a solution. The Committee The United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHCR for short) is a United Nations body to promote and protect human rights around the world. The committee has 47 members elected for 3-year terms. The headquarters are not in New York, but in Geneva, Switzerland.
    [Show full text]
  • Nationality and Statelessness: a Handbook for Parliamentarians
    Handbook for Parliamentarians n° 11 - 2005 UNHCR A Handbook for Parliamentarians Nationality and Statelessness: Nationality and Statelessness: A Handbook for Parliamentarians “Citizenship is man’s basic right for it is nothing less than the right to have rights” Chief Justice Earl Warren (USA 1958). IPU INTER-PARLIAMENTARY INTER-PARLIAMENTARY UNION UNION Nationality and Statelessness A Handbook for Parliamentarians Acknowledgements This handbook was prepared with the cooperation of the Bureau of the Inter- Parliamentary Union’s Standing Committee on Democracy and Human Rights. Research and analysis: Carol Batchelor and Philippe Leclerc (UNHCR) Writer: Ms. Marilyn Achiron Editorial Board: UNHCR: Erika Feller, Philippe Leclerc, José Riera and Sara Baschetti IPU: Anders B. Johnsson and Kareen Jabre Original version: English Cover design by Jacques Wandfluh, Studio Infographie, Switzerland Printed in Switzerland by Presses Centrales de Lausanne 2 Foreword “Everyone has the right to a nationality. No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his nationality nor denied the right to change his nationality.” With those succinct statements, Article 15 of the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights confers upon every individual, everywhere in the world, the right to have a legal connection with a State. Citizenship or nationality (the two terms are used interchangeably in this hanbook, just as they usually are in international law) not only provides people with a sense of identity, it entitles individuals to the protection of a State and to many civil and political rights. Indeed, citizenship has been described as “the right to have rights.” Despite the body of international law relating to the acquisition, loss, or denial of citizenship, millions of people around the world have no nationality.
    [Show full text]
  • What Is Statelessness? © UNHCR / R
    What is Statelessness? © UNHCR / R. Arnold It is estimated that at least 10 million people are stateless worldwide: they are not considered as nationals by any State under the operation of its law. Statelessness is sometimes referred to as an invisible problem because stateless people often remain unseen and unheard. They often aren’t allowed to go to school, see a doctor, get a job, open a bank account, buy a house or even get married. Denial of these rights impacts not only the individuals concerned but also society as a whole, in particular because excluding an entire sector of the population can lead to social tensions and significantly impair economic and social development. HOW DO PEOPLE BECOME STATELESS? WHERE DO THEY LIVE? Statelessness can be caused by a number of factors such as: Although statelessness may in many contexts be a hidden discrimination in nationality laws (e.g. racial, religious or problem, stateless people are found in all regions of the world. gender), conflict between and gaps in nationality laws and The majority of statelessness people were born in the countries State succession. Being undocumented is not the same as being in which they have lived their entire lives. Countries with notably stateless. However lack of birth registration can put people large stateless populations include Myanmar, Kuwait, Cote at risk of statelessness as a birth certificate provides proof d’Ivoire, Thailand, Iraq, and the Dominican Republic. Significant of where a person was born and parentage – key information populations also live in the countries around the world which needed to establish a nationality.
    [Show full text]
  • 'Unmaking Americans. Insecure Citizenship in the United States'
    UNMAKING AMERICANS INSECURE CITIZENSHIP IN THE UNITED STATES INSECURE CITIZENSHIP IN THE UNITED STATEs 1 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The lead author of this report is Laura Bingham, senior managing legal officer of the Open Society Justice Initiative. The report was co-authored by Natasha Arnpriester, a Justice Initiative Aryeh Neier Fellow, without whose outstanding contributions, including extensive research and data analysis on denaturalizations, the report would not have been possible. The report was edited by David Berry and James A. Goldston. Many others have contributed to the report from within and outside the organization. Special thanks to the many colleagues from the Open Society Foundations who have guided the development and drafting of the report, in particular: Brooke Havlik, Angela Kelley, Wendy Patten, Maggie Soladay, Betsy Apple, Erika Dailey, Robert O. Varenik, Michèle Eken, and Laura Lázaro Cabrera. Deepest thanks to all those who dedicated their time and shared their personal histories and professional experience in order to inform the report, with the hope that it does justice to their contributions. We are likewise grateful for the pro bono research assistance provided by attorneys from a number of law firms including White & Case, LLP, Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP, and Davis Wright Tremaine LLP. For more information contact: Laura Bingham Senior Managing Legal Officer Open Society Justice Initiative [email protected] 2 UNMAKING AMERICANS © 2019 Open Society Foundations This publication is available as a PDF on the Open Society Foundations website under a Creative Commons license that allows copying and distributing the publication, only in its entirety, as long as it is attributed to the Open Society Foundations and used for noncommercial educational or public policy purposes.
    [Show full text]