Showing papers on "Statelessness published in 2006"
TL;DR: In this article, the authors present a broad examination of the human rights of stateless persons through legal, theoretical, and practical lenses, and conclude with recommendations regarding remedies and solutions for statelessness.
Abstract: By exploring statelessness through legal, theoretical, and practical lenses, this article presents a broad examination of the human rights of stateless persons. The article delineates the rights of stateless persons as enunciated in various human rights instruments; presents the mechanisms of, and paths to, statelessness; illustrates the practical struggles of stateless persons by highlighting the plights of various stateless populations; examines how the problem of statelessness is being addressed; and considers the complex political and regional forces affecting policies towards stateless persons. The article concludes with recommendations regarding remedies and solutions for statelessness.
73 citations
TL;DR: The relationship between political restructuring and the restriction of civil and social protections to noncitizens has been explored in this article, where the authors draw attention to the relationship between statelessness and political restructuring.
Abstract: Recent studies on statelessness have drawn attention to the relationship between political restructuring and the restriction of civil and social protections to noncitizens (Weissbrodt 2003; Frelick...
48 citations
Posted Content•
TL;DR: This paper used an event study to investigate the impact of anarchy on Somali development and found that Somalis are better off under anarchy than they were under government, and that renewed vibrancy in critical sectors of Somalia's economy and public goods in the absence of a predatory state are responsible for this improvement.
Abstract: Could anarchy be good for Somalia's development? If state predation goes unchecked government may not only fail to add to social welfare, but can actually reduce welfare below its level under statelessness. Such was the case with Somalia's government, which did more harm to its citizens than good. The government's collapse and subsequent emergence of statelessness opened the opportunity for Somali progress. This paper uses an event study to investigate the impact of anarchy on Somali development. The data suggest that while the state of this development remains low, on nearly all of 18 key indicators that allow pre- and post-stateless welfare comparisons, Somalis are better off under anarchy than they were under government. Renewed vibrancy in critical sectors of Somalia's economy and public goods in the absence of a predatory state are responsible for this improvement.
27 citations
TL;DR: A special edition of the Refugee Survey Quarterly is devoted to nationality matters and highlights the problem of statelessness as mentioned in this paper, which is defined as the lack of a legal bond of nationality with any state.
Abstract: This special edition of the Refugee Survey Quarterly is devoted to nationality matters and highlights the problem of statelessness. International instruments, jurisprudence, and efforts of concerned organizations as well as of states to address the issue of statelessness are outlined in detail in the various articles. Amongst those working in the fi eld of nationality there is a general consensus that statelessness is an anomaly, something of an aberration in legal terms. The world is composed of states. Individual legal identity, as well as practical access to individual rights and entitlements, is largely derived from one’s legal bond with one or more of these states. Statelessness is the lack of a legal bond of nationality with any state. This lack of a bond is determined through reference to laws, including through their implementation. Ironically, therefore, it is by virtue of a legal defi nition that one is determined to be lacking a legal existence. One could be born in a state to a national of that state, live there all of one’s life and never have set foot on the territory of another state, but still not be a national depending on what the law says. Likewise, a person could never have visited a state and have no family tie there, know nothing about the culture or language, but still be considered a national or citizen if the law so declares. While I can, as a human being, claim my right to a nationality as provided in Article 15 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, access to this right will ultimately be dependent upon the decisions taken by politicians, policy-makers, and technicians within each state. It is remarkable, that despite substantial advances recognizing the importance of human rights, an individual can be inadvertently or deliberately rendered stateless without a legal identity in any state by virtue of decisions taken without the person’s knowledge or input. It is equally remarkable that those implementing nationality laws in any given state have often not been included in discussions concerning policy considerations, implications of specifi c actions in applying the law, or overall objectives underlying the key aspects of the law. Few politicians, decision-makers, or practitioners have had exposure to the core principles underlying nationality attribution as outlined in international legal instruments, including principles concerning the importance of and methods for avoiding statelessness.
15 citations
11 citations
01 Jan 2006
TL;DR: Benhabib and Power as discussed by the authors argued that increasing numbers of market victims are being expelled from meaningful membership in an organized political community through a process of the contractualization and commodification of citizenship.
Abstract: The revival of attention to Hannah Arendt’s discussion of stateless people in her magisterial The Origins of Totalitarianism (1951) has added enormously to our current understandings of migration, citizenship, and ethnos in the context of globalization (see especially Benhabib, 2004, 2001; Power, 2004). In this chapter,1 I bring Arendt’s analysis to bear on a very different kind of statelessness (to date not yet recognized) one that characterizes, those who hold de jure American citizenship but who are being expelled from the rights-bearing terrain of the rule of the law, from protection by the social state, and from access to the public sphere. My argument is that increasing numbers of market victims are being expelled from meaningful membership in an organized political community—that which confers and recognizes human identity—via a process of the contractualization and commodification of citizenship. Systematically degrading the public sphere and making the institutions of the social state increasingly irrelevant, these market regimes are transforming the foundations of citizenship from social and political to contractual and civil. As both Arendt and Karl Polanyi understood, governing through contractualism returns the social to the tyranny of naturalism and the stateless “freedom” of natural rights. In short, it steals the “right to have rights,” the very precondition for personhood.
11 citations
9 citations
Book•
25 Oct 2006
TL;DR: In this article, the authors present a survey of the work of the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe/Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE): General Multilateral, Nationality and Statelessness.
Abstract: Part I. General Multilateral. Part II. Nationality and Statelessness. Part III. Refugees: General. Part IV. Refugees: Council of Europe. Part V. Council of Europe: Other. Part VI. Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe/Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe. Part VII. European Community Law. Part VIII. European Union: Cooperation in the Fields of Justice and Home Affairs. Part IX. European Community Agreements with Third Countries. Part X. International Labour Organisation: Conventions. Part XI. International Labour Organisation: Recommendations. Part XII. Miscellaneous.
9 citations
TL;DR: The question of whether the German constitution permits revocation of German citizenship under what conditions was first raised in this article. But it is unclear whether there are exceptions to the constitutional protection against statelessness, e.g., in cases of fraud.
Abstract: Like many of the provisions of the German Grundgesetz (Basic Law – GG) the constitutional protection of German citizenship enshrined in Article 16.1 GG is a reaction to the atrocities committed by Nazi-Germany. From early on, the Nazis had abused nationality law not only as a sanctioning device to discipline Germans living abroad but also to ostracize unwanted citizens and confiscate their property, i.e., as a means of large scale political and racial discrimination. This inhuman denaturalization practice culminated in the 11. Verordnung zum Reichsburgergesetz (11th ordinance of 25 November 1941, issued by virtue of the Reich's Citizenship Law), which stripped Jewish citizens living abroad of their German nationality, aiming inter alia at Jews deported to concentration camps in Eastern Europe. To prevent any kind of political abuse of denaturalization measures in the future, Article 16.1 sent. 1 GG guarantees that no German may be deprived of his nationality. There is a long-standing debate about the precise meaning of this strict ban on any “deprivation” of nationality, because at the same time Article 16.1 sent. 2 GG allows for the loss of German nationality against the will of the person affected if this loss has a statutory basis and the person does not become stateless as a result. Thus, it is unclear whether the constitution permits a revocation of German citizenship, and if so under what conditions. Further, this debate broaches the questions of whether there are, in fact, exceptions to the constitutional protection against statelessness, e.g., in cases of fraud.
2 citations
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors discuss the legal status of dual nationals and the development of the international law of nationality, including the Tunis and Morocco Nationality Decrees before the PCIJ in 1923, the League of Nations codifying Convention on Certain Questions Relating to the Conflict of nationality Laws, 1930; and the Nottebohm case before the ICJ, 1953, in particular.
Abstract: The presentation begins with introductory remarks centred principally on the topicality of the legal status of dual nationals. Whereas earlier the doctrine of State sovereignty required that an individual have only one nationality, the status of dual nationality is now increasingly accepted, though not created, by States. The development of human rights law is of importance insofar as statelessness is now considered to be a greater evil. It then continues with some basic principles in international law, the first being that it is for each State to decide who are its nationals. This leads to a discussion of some landmarks in the development of the international law of nationality: the Tunis and Morocco Nationality Decrees before the PCIJ in 1923; the League of Nations codifying Convention on Certain Questions Relating to the Conflict of nationality Laws, 1930; and the Nottebohm case before the ICJ, 1953, in particular. Te greatest contribution to the topic has come from the Iran-United States C...