Nationality or citizenship?

[abduarif]

Dr Md Shahjahan Mondol , Dr Reba Mondol

Nationality and citizenship are two different ideas having different meanings. Problem arises when the meaning of one term is merged into the other, used interchangeably and thereby a person suffers from identity-problem while being assessed as a national, ie, member of a nation, or a citizen, ie, member of a state. It should also be kept in mind that citizenship, but not always nationality, of every member of a state is usually determined by law.

Meanings of nationality and citizenship

Nationality is a psychological and socio-political concept, not a legal one. Whereas citizenship is a legal concept. When a populace has the same ethnicity, language, religion, race, literature, history, heritage or tradition which makes it feel distinct from other people, it is called a nationality. This is the psychological aspect of nationality. No political spirit or aspiration of being independent is a  prerequisite for this. On the other hand, from socio-political point of view, when a group of people has the same political spirit alongside the above mentioned ingredients, it is also a nationality. Same political spirit is the main determinant here. When such a nationality becomes successful in establishing a state, it is called a nation or a nation-state. When such a state emerges, the  people automatically get its citizenship. Nationality cannot be changed by law, but citizenship can.

Nationality and citizenship in some judicial pronouncement

In Mavrommatis Palestine Concession Case (PCIJ, 1924), it was decided that if a state does unjust behaviour towards an alien, his own state possesses the right to extend diplomatic protection to its citizens. JG Starke, a renowned expert in international law, mentions in Nottebohm’s case (ICJ, 1955) that there was Lichtenstein’s grant of nationality to Mr Nottebohm. Dr SK Kapoor and Dr Nagendra Singh also cited the court’s observation that nationality was conferred on Mr Nottebohm by means of naturalisation. Question arises as to whether “naturalisation” is a means of granting “nationality” or “citizenship.”

A good answer to the question is posed by Dr Mizanur Rahman in Parivartanshil Vishwe Antarjatik Aain, when he mentions the same case and says that it is made clear in this case that any state may confer citizenship on any person, but diplomatic protection to him may be extended only by the state having “genuine link” with that citizen. The answer receives completeness when he concludes the case with the statement: “This doctrine (of genuine link) is very effective in determining the state eligible to give diplomatic protection in case of dual citizenship.”

Nationality and citizenship in the context of Bangladesh

The constitution of Bangladesh provides in Article 6(2) that the people of Bangladesh will be known as Bangalee as a nation. Article 9 of the constitution provides that the unity and solidarity of the Bangalee nation, which, deriving its identity from its language and culture, successfully formed sovereign and independent Bangladesh through a united and determined struggle in the war of independence, will be the basis of Bangalee nationalism.

Article 6(2) provides that the citizens of Bangladesh will be known as Bangladeshis. Article 6(1) provides that the citizenship of Bangladesh shall be determined and regulated by law. The Citizenship Act of 1951 and the Citizenship (Temporary Provisions) Order of 1972 determine and regulate the issue of citizenship in the country. The provisions of the constitution and the law show a clear position of Bangladesh with regard to the definition as well as identification of nation, nationality, citizen, and citizenship.

Sometimes it seems to be parallel to the opinions of the legal scholars as well as some of the laws applicable globally or to the World Court cases. Sometimes it does not stand in the same line. In that case, the letter and spirit of Article 7(2) of the constitution of Bangladesh may be remembered: “This Constitution is, as the solemn expression of the will of the people, the supreme law of the Republic, and if any other law is inconsistent with this Constitution that other law shall, to the extent of inconsistency, be void.”

Nationality and citizenship in some international instruments

Some instruments regarding either nationality or citizenship or both are found to have been adopted worldwide. On perusal thereof it may be deemed that many of them intended to mean “citizenship” but wrote “nationality.” Such confusion is desired not to be maintained or sustained. The approach of the constitution of Bangladesh in this regard seems to be precise. The fusion of the concepts and the confusion remaining in this regard in the international instruments may be taken in line with the Bangladeshi law and the constitution.  The terms nationality as mentioned in the following instruments may, therefore, be replaced by the term citizenship:

Convention on Certain Questions Relating to The Conflict of Nationality Laws, 1930

Convention Relating to the Status of Stateless Persons, 1954

UN Convention on the Reduction of Statelessness, 1961

UN Convention on the Status of Refugees, 1951

UN Convention on the Nationality of Married Women, 1957

Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women, 1979

The ambiguity regarding the concepts, nationality and citizenship, should be removed.

One interesting example may be added here by means of questioning: Is the United Nations Organisation (UNO), an organisation of the nations of the world, or the states of the world? Anyone who is aware of the terminological differences between nationality and citizenship, can smoothly reach a precise decision in this regard and may think fit to rename the institution as the United States Organisation (USO). Such modification and clarification of the idea can help rescue people from identity problem, national or citizen, worldwide.

The amendments, where appropriate, converting nationality into citizenship, to the instruments  mentioned above as well as all other allied legal and human rights instruments in the light of the discussion are felt not only helpful but also necessary. Accordingly, the terms dual nationality, acquisition and loss of nationality, and genuine link of nationality which are frequently mentioned in legal texts may be replaced by the terms dual citizenship, acquisition and loss of citizenship, and genuine link of citizenship.

See more at: http://www.dhakatribune.com/juris/2014/jul/10/nationality-or-citizenship#sthash.9hpNopvl.dpuf

[Ferdousi Begum]

hmmm. often this two look like similar and we make mistake.

[abduarif]

Yes, these two concepts are overlapping and usually used interchangeably.