Search

In times of economic crisis in the destination country, migrants might decide to stay or leave. Having obtained dual citizenship facilitates both options: on the one hand, it allows for a secure stay, without fear of losing residence permits. On the other hand, it allows for either a connected return or new cross-border mobility options, especially in the case of citizenship from the EU. It can also be considered a significant milestone in someone’s migratory trajectory, especially among those who started their migration as undocumented. This paper discusses the ways in which dual citizens interpret this status after the 2008 economic crisis in Spain and shows how it provided many with the opportunity to embark on new migrations within the EU. Drawing on 80 interviews with dual citizens born in Colombia and Ecuador who resided in Madrid and London, the authors argue that dual citizenship is understood as a resource that offers a sense of personal security and an enhancement of one’s position in the global hierarchy of citizenships. Respondents in this study do not consider formal citizenship as a necessary step for emotional belonging, which they base on their daily interactions and relationships. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article offers information related to politics in Australia and Europe. Topics include the disqualification of by-election candidates including Australian Labor Party (ALP) Susan Lamp, Rebekha Sharkie of Centre Alliance, and Justine Keay of ALP on July 28, 2018 due to dual citizenship or resignation; the European Union (EU) (Withdrawal Bill) which aims to repeal the European Communities Act 1972; and the shortening of summer holidays of the Great Britain House of Lords.

Abstract: In this article, I examine voting patterns in origin and receiving country national elections among immigrants in Europe. The existing scholarship on transnational political engagement offers two competing interpretations of the relationship between immigrant integration and transnational engagement, which I classify as the resocialization and complementarity perspectives. The resocialization perspective assumes that transnational political engagement gradually declines as immigrants become socialized into the new receiving society. Conversely, the complementarity perspective assumes that immigrant integration increases transnational political engagement. I test these competing perspectives with survey data collected between 2004 and 2008 for 12 different immigrant groups residing in seven European cities. The analysis examines how immigrant political and civic participation in receiving countries affect their proclivities to vote in homeland elections. I also analyse the effects of receiving and origin country contexts on immigrant voting behaviour in homeland elections. While my findings support both the resocialization and complementarity perspectives, they also highlight the ways in which a set of origin‐country contexts shape immigrant propensities to engage in transnational electoral politics. I observe a degree of complementarity among immigrants with resources who are motivated and eligible to participate in both receiving and origin‐country elections. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses the political situation in Australia under the leadership of Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull from July to December 2017. Topics explored include the impact of the dual citizenship crisis on Australian members of parliament, the resignation and replacement of politician Fiona Nash from the Australian Senate, and the alleged alliance between Chinese business leaders and some Australian political parties and politicians.

The article discusses the economic and political situation in Tasmania from July to December 2017. Topics explored include the Tasmanian Parliament representation secured by the Labor Party, the planned retirement of Liberal Party member Matthew Groom, and the impact of the dual citizenship controversy on Tasmanian members of parliament Stephen Parry and Jacqui Lambie.

This article examines the question of State succession to bilateral investment treaties (BITs) in the unique context whereby the events leading to this change in sovereignty happen during an arbitration proceeding. I will assess the impact this will have on the respondent State in the proceedings which may cease to exist (dissolution, unification, and integration) or lose part of its territory (cession, secession). Succession may also affect the home State of the claimant investor and result in that person losing its nationality and acquiring a new one. An arbitral tribunal should continue to have jurisdiction over a dispute whenever a claimant involuntarily changes its nationality in such context. While the same conclusion should apply when changes affect the respondent State, major difficulties will arise if that State ceases to exist and no other State is willing to participate in the proceedings. I will examine the limits of tribunals' powers in this respect. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Supporters of the GMD (Guomindang) and CCP (Chinese Communist Party) tend to emphasize the differences between the two parties in their policies toward the overseas Chinese and see the power transfer in 1949 as a watershed in the evolution of China’s official policies toward them. However, a close examination of the policies and practices that both parties adopted in managing overseas Chinese affairs indicates that from 1949 to 1966, the PRC followed many of the policies toward the overseas Chinese that the ROC adopted between 1911 and 1949, although they also made some significant changes. The beginning of the Cultural Revolution in 1966, which caused a radical change of previous policies toward the overseas Chinese, was a much more important turning point than 1949 in the relations between the Chinese government and the overseas Chinese. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Recently, the Court of Amsterdam (the 'Court') decided to ask preliminary questions to the ECJ about EU citizens' rights of British nationals, anticipating Brexit. However, two weeks later, it allowed an appeal against this decision. It is therefore unclear if and when these questions will be asked. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Are democratic states permitted to denationalize citizens, in particular those whom they believe pose dangers to the physical safety of others? In this article, I argue that they are not. The power to denationalize citizens—that is, to revoke citizenship—is one that many states have historically claimed for themselves, but which has largely been in disuse in the last several decades. Recent terrorist events have, however, prompted scholars and political actors to reconsider the role that denationalization can and perhaps should play in democratic states, in particular with respect to its role in protecting national security and in supporting the global fight against terror more generally. In this article, my objective is to show that denationalization laws have no place in democratic states. To understand why, I propose examining the foundations of the right of citizenship, which lie, I shall argue, in the very strong interests that individuals have in security of residence. I use this formulation of the right to respond to two broad clusters of arguments: (1) those that claim that it is justifiable to denationalize citizens who threaten to undermine the safety of citizens in a democratic state or the ability of a democratic state to function as a democratic state, and (2) those that claim that it is justifiable to denationalize dual citizens because they possess citizenship status in a second country that is also able to protect their rights. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

The article provides a practical guide for how U.S. citizens of Italian descent can obtain Italian citizenship by reasserting their claim to bloodline and explores the relationship between citizenship, culture, and identity.

The article provides a brief overview of the politics of the Australian government from January to June 2017 under the leadership of prime minister Malcolm Turnbull. Topics include the resignation of Health Minister Sussan Ley and the subsequent shifting of cabinet ministers, the court decision ending the term of Western Australian Senator Rod Culleton for a constitutional violation, issues of political participation and dual nationality, and Australia's response to the election of U.S. President Donald Trump.

In two of the busiest migration corridors of the twentieth century, namely Mexico-US and Turkey-Germany, migrants can today be dual citizens. However, the acceptance of dual citizenship did not occur automatically; instead, it followed a period of legal statuses short of full citizenship. This paper conceptualises such statuses as quasi-citizenship, a transitional equilibrium between the absence of plural citizenship and the existence of transnational migration. Focusing on sending states, the emergence of emigrant quasi-citizenship is thus explained, first, in terms of whether the reciprocal regimes of emigration and immigration states diverge on the acceptance of plural citizenship. Second, the stance towards plural citizenship is explained in terms of the experience with emigration. It is then shown that, in the case of Mexico, the legacy of undesired emigration weakened the incentives to adapt the territorial conception of citizenship to expatriates, hence creating quasi-citizens, and in the case of Turkey, the higher political relevance of expatriates, who could have the host country citizenship, reinforced the external dimension of the ethno-cultural conception of citizenship. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article focuses on the hullabaloo surrounding the dual citizenship in the Australian Parliament. It discusses the resignation of senator Scott Ludlam citing dual citizenship concerns which caused a ripple effect as disqualification of deputy prime minister Barnaby Joyce, resignation of senate president Stephen Parry and politician John Alexander.

[Display omitted] • Numbers of trophy hunting kills & exports inconsistent for all 32 endangered species. • 4726 trophy kills but only 3131 hunting trophy exports of these species were reported. • The United States is the major contributor to the 2018 South African wildlife industry. • Per capita, Denmark is the largest contributor into trophy hunting industry. • A less ambiguous interpretation of "trophy" (CITES Trade database) is recommended. Trophy hunting constitutes a major part of the global wildlife tourism industry and is connected through the export of kills to international wildlife trade. Inconsistencies between kills and exports can contribute to identifying illegal trophy hunting that constitutes a major threat to biodiversity conservation. This paper quantitatively analyses to what extent the data of trophy hunting kills and of trophy exports are consistent using the example of South Africa. Data was extracted from two different sources for the year 2018. These sources were trade data reported under the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES) and its Trade Database on the export of trophy items from South Africa, which is compared with the South African Professional Hunting statistics (SAPHs) containing trophy kills information for each species and the country of origin of the hunter. The data of trophy hunting kills and data of trophy hunting export was found to differ to varying degrees across the countries contributing to trophy hunting and CITES-listed trophy-hunted species. We found that both databases report hunting of the same 28 threatened taxa. On the other hand, the same data reports that hunters of 64 nationalities participated in a total of 4,726 trophy kills, while only 3,131 hunting trophy items were exported from South Africa, to 37 countries as final destinations. Among the possible reasons for the discrepancies found, we suggest that the time required to taxidermize trophy specimens may delay the items being addressed to their final destination, in addition to the dual citizenship of some hunters that should also have some influence on our results, as well as the important commercial destination of Brussels Airport. The USA show the highest absolute number of trophy hunters, followed by Spain, but Denmark is the highest driver per capita. Therefore, greater participation of these countries in conservation policies for endangered species is necessary. Additionally, a more detailed differentiation of the term "trophy" to more specific terms such as claws, skins, skulls, etc. may improve reporting systems to easier identify illegal activities related to hunting. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

McCarthy attempted to rely upon rights under Directive 2004/38 within a home state, but this was not a straightforward case of a purely internal situation, the applicant having acquired Irish nationality and claiming that she was a Union citizen living within the UK as a host Member State. The use of dual citizenship as a potential linking element with Union law follows from earlier developments in citizenship case law. Union citizenship has helped those who do not fully meet requirements of secondary legislation. The ‘trigger’ of cross-border movement has been weakened to some extent in the identity cases, and others such as Carpenter. McCarthy’s attempt to rely upon Union law without ever having moved, just by being a Union citizen, gave the Court of Justice of the European Union a chance to dispel ideas that being a dual Member State national was automatically a linking factor with EU law.

Using data for the period 1968-2001, this article assesses the influence of partner choice and origin country characteristics on the propensity of immigrants to naturalize in Sweden. Marriage to a foreign-born Swedish citizen increases the naturalization propensity, and its effect increases strongly when the spouse naturalizes during the same year. The analysis suggests that a lower level of civic and political freedom or relative GDP per capita in the individual's country of origin is associated with an elevated probability of naturalization. During the period of study, originating from a country which allows for dual citizenship did not systematically elevate the probability to naturalize; this probability was accentuated, however, if the individual originated from a context characterized by a low degree of civic and political freedom. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The authors argue that the political exclusion of displaced people living within states under a variety of humanitarian and policy categories is simultaneously constitutive of mainstream political belongingandsocial belonging for those excluded. Based on long-term research engagement with displacement in Georgia, Jordan and Sudan, they analyse situations in which an initial crisis-based humanitarian status has become protracted, and in which people have been labelled both forced migrants and citizens, giving rise to tensions with the mainstream but also creating social identities that foster belonging from experiences of exclusion. By analysing these processes as abjection – forms of state control and boundary-making that exclude members from what requires their inclusion – they show that a type of ambiguous citizenship emerges from protracted situations of displacement. People ‘out of place’ but within a state exclude themselves from full citizenship rights by nurturing an alternative status derived from their experiences with displacement regimes. When established and enduring for a lengthy period, such displacement statuses become social categories and identities through processes of abjection. The authors conclude that citizenship itself becomes ambiguous through norms of belonging, the formation of new social categories, and because forced migrants help to constitute the political. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article presents a theoretical argument for aligning principles of citizenship with realities of migrant transnationalism and dual citizenship. Migrant transnationalism and dual citizenship challenge zero-sum understandings of belonging and residence as rooted in one place only. Through the lens of residence, the authors connect insights from migrant transnationalism literature with citizenship studies’ focus on principles of citizenship. Principles of citizenship based on descent and birthplace build on particular genealogies of belonging that define membership, and are the basis on which citizenship is granted. Neither of the two principles provides adequate answers to how naturalisation, in terms of belonging to the political community, can be justified as anything other than exceptions.Jus domicilioffers a complementary alternative, wherein belonging is connected to residence, thus moving naturalisation out of the realm of exceptions. A configuration of principles of citizenship that is aligned with realities of migrant transnationalism and dual citizenship must build on complementary genealogies of belonging, including descent, birthplace and residence. Doing so requires acknowledging differing temporalities of belonging. A legal framework that strengthens the potential for realising equal citizenship in diverse societies necessitates a rejection of the hierarchies reflected in genealogies of belonging that underlie citizenship principles. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The purpose of the article is to explore the complex and contested politics of urban citizenship in relation to everyday spaces in Delft, a poor township in Cape Town South Africa. The arguments build upon a decade of ethnographic research on community politics and organizing relating to housing in Delft, Cape Town. Through illustrative examples, the author shows how housing rights and policies have been mediated through and imbricated with racial identities, residential status and notions of belonging in the community. She finds that these subjectivities are not inherent in conflict but often overlap and work simultaneously in community organizing and practice. These findings inform a critical engagement with current rethinking of urban citizenship in the Global South. The author argues that attention to the ordinary and everyday practices of citizenship may lead to a better understanding of how political subjectivities and agency are produced and practised. She concludes by proposing three dimensions that could guide a research agenda on everyday politics of urban citizenship: reconstructions of political subjectivities through state–society encounters, implications of differentiated subjectivities for how urban citizenship is perceived and claimed, and what practices of citizenship are seen as expressions of political agency. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In the theory-oriented article, the author discusses the meaning of politics of citizenship. He argues that a broad conception of citizenship may provide an integral framework for studying political contentions over cultural, legal, social and political exclusion and inclusion. He starts out from an identification of four key dimensions of citizenship and defines politics of citizenship as contentious interactions over the institutionalisation and realisation of substantive membership, legal status, rights and participation. This is followed by a review of cultural and global turns within the liberal nation-state model of citizenship, demonstrating that the form and substance of citizenship reflect contextual power relations and political contentions. Following from this observation, he discusses the issues at stake in citizenship politics, with special attention to three interrelated dimensions: politics of recognition for cultural inclusion, politics of redistribution for social justice, and politics of representation for political inclusion. This discussion points to fundamental tensions and strategic dilemmas, but also to points of convergence around affirmative and transformative remedies for injustice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Literature on diaspora engagement policies, transnational and extra-territorial citizenship has painted the increasing recognition of dual nationality and the extension of state policies to the diaspora as a signal of states leaving behind the paradigms of exclusive nationality and residence as conditions to exercise citizenship. In doing this, this literature tends to treat citizenship and nationality as synonyms. By analysing the citizenship policies of 22 Latin American and Caribbean states towards their nationals who reside abroad and/or acquire another nationality, we add key nuances to such consideration: nationality and citizenship may relate to different legal statuses – with important consequences for migrants – and there might be differences also between the citizen rights of nationals by origin and of nationals by naturalization. In particular, we show that citizenship and nationality interact in different ways when it comes to the preservation of rights for emigrants: the distinctions allow restricting the portability of citizenship rights for nationals by birth, and other groups of nationals, depending on the exclusivity, and origin, of their national belonging. These distinctions tell a potentially different story of how citizenship is conceived of by states as they approach the challenges of membership and participation posed by emigration, and paint a less rosy picture with regard to the demise of exclusive nationality. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

The authors comment on Alice Bloch's commentary on their paper which looked at how the political repertoires of sending states were changing in response to migration. Topics covered include the changing form and function of the nation-state, the rise in multiple memberships, be they dual citizenship or some form of partial membership without residence, and the deployment of diasporic policies to consolidate emigrants' attachments and contributions to their homelands.