Critically examine the relationship between citizenship and nationality.

University Degree Law

Name: Allistair Short

Module: PO 3125

Date: 6th December 2001

Name: Allistair Short

Course: BA Politics and Government

Module: PO 3125

Tutor: Keith Faulks

Critically examine the relationship between citizenship and nationality.

In order to critically examine the relationship between and nationality it is important to take into account the following factors. Firstly, where it is possible to clearly define citizenship and nationality. Secondly, the history of both citizenship and nationality and to what extent they have a relationship with one another. Finally, it is equally important to look at the future of citizenship and nationality and whether or not either or both have a future. Nationality has been defined as “The state of a person in relation to the nation in which he was born. A man retains his nationality of origin during his minority, but, as in the case of his domicil of origin, he may change his nationality upon attaining full age; he cannot, however, renounce his allegiance without permission of the government.”(1) In simpler terms this means that we usually owe our nationality to the country in which we are born. The term nationality derives from the Roman god Natio, who was goddess of birth and origin. (2) Citizenship has been defined as “the relationship between the individual and the state, and among individuals within a state.”(3) That is to say we all have as citizens a relationship with the state based on duty. An individuals duty is to obey the law and participate in society, such as the market and politics, this is offset by the states duty to provide law and order and a safe market place so we can carry out our duties and be good citizens.

Historically, it would appear that citizenship and nationality have always being intrinsically linked together. Although it is only in the last few hundred years that the nation-states we now recognise have come into existence. People have for thousands of years claimed their individual identity by the nation of their birth or adoption. According to Faulks the “extent of citizenship,

then, has been determined by boundaries between states.”(4) For example in Europe, Italy only became the state we now recognise in the nineteenth

century and many countries, such as India and Pakistan, still dispute their respective national boundaries. Early examples of citizenship can be found in the ancient city-states of Sparta and Athens. In these cities only males, women and slaves were excluded, took active part in the government of the people and the city. Those that did take part were seen to be serving the state either voluntarily or because they were paid to do so possibly an early example of bureaucrats. The relationship between citizenship and nationality in this case are related as those not from Sparta or Athens had no rights within those cities and were seen by citizens of the city-states as outsiders or foreigners. This type of small society based citizenship is still practised in some Cantons (small communities) in Switzerland and in the US state of New Hampshire to this day. However, it must be noted that these forms of citizenship are within the boundaries of a larger nation-state and the rights and responsibilities of those citizens are governed by the larger nation-state to which they belong and their loyalty is to the state first and their community second.

Citizenship has also been used as a means of maintaining or even expanding national boundaries. For example France countered German claims to the Alsace region by giving its inhabitants the status of citizens of France and thus a collective identity so they would believe that they were part of the nation of France, this can help to show the relationship between citizenship and nationality. However, as Van Steenbergen points out “the nation of citizens does not derive its identity from common ethnic and cultural properties but rather from the praxis of citizens who actively exercise their civil ...

This is a preview of the whole essay

Colonialism is another example of where the concepts of citizenship and nationality clash. The Holy Roman Empire fought, defeated and controlled much of Western Europe and Northern Africa. However, the indigenous peoples of those countries which were occupied were not entitled to the rights or nationality that were given freely to Roman Citizens and were treated as a sub-class or even simply enslaved. A modern example of this could be seen in the British Empire in that the people of conquered states who wished to come to the ‘mother country’ after independence, such as in Hong Kong, were unable to as they didn’t hold full passports with full citizenship and residency privileges unless of course they were rich in which case a different set of rules to citizenship and nationality were applied by the state. In Africa

as a result of colonialism state boundaries set by European states crossed through traditional ethnic groups and boundaries separating them from each other and thus creating minority groups in some countries. This has led to civil wars and much suffering for those groups left in a nation where they are the

minority group and their citizens’ rights are attacked by the ethnic majority for example in Rwanda.

In the post second world war era, the formation of the United Nations and the 1948 universal declaration of human rights, followed by the 1950 European Convention on Human Rights, was made was meant to place rights above the state and create a kind of supranational citizenship. These rights included to right to life, education and even paid holidays. However, even the countries which signed up to the declaration often ignored human rights in their own national interest such as in the treatment of women or political prisoners. In the USA a written constitution was intended to enshrine citizenship and its associated rights and responsibilities. Unfortunately this was not to include blacks and Native American Indians who were considered sub-human and so were not entitled to the rights all citizens were meant to have by right in what was their nation of birth and where their nationality was considered to be American.

In Europe the creation of the European Union (EU) in 1957 led to a grouping of nations, which now numbers fifteen including the UK. Initially set up as a result of the need to rebuild post war Europe the EU has evolved to

include a court of human rights and through the 1997 Treaty of Amsterdam and created in legal terms the concept of a European citizenship. This treaty gives citizens rights not only as citizens of their own country of origin within the EU but also as a citizen of the entire union. This could be seen as an example of citizenship being a concept above that of nationality. It must be

said however that an individual must hold citizenship of a member state to be able to claim the benefits of EU citizenship, which does in fact limit citizenship to a person’s nationality. The following statement was made about these new rights “with the 1992 Treaty of Maastricht, the link between the citizens in the Member States and the European Union became more direct, with the creation of the concept of European citizenship, which introduced a series of civil and political rights. These rights were further developed by the 1997 Treaty of Amsterdam, which also specified the link between national citizenship and European citizenship.”(6)

Another major problem affecting the concepts of both citizenship and nationality is that of migration. In the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries millions of people were leaving their country of origin to colonise new territories such as America. One such group were Italians who became a virtual nation of migrants setting up almost exclusively Italian communities in America. These communities did not however lead to a new state of Italy or a colonial outpost for Rome, rather than new citizens for a new country embracing the rights offered to them by America as American citizens. This

was migration for purely economic reasons, which was welcomed by the American government who were creating a new a large nation-state. In the modern era this economic migration is again being taken up not for the gaining of rights but for financial benefit. Many, of those attempting to come to Europe at the moment are classed as illegal immigrants. So we could be in danger of creating a class system for citizenship based on nationality. Those people who live in countries where access to education and welfare is not a right look to the EU and want to be a part of a richer society so they can get the same rights. Whether or not the EU member states accept these migrants or attempt to help the less wealthy countries develop civil rights and markets rights through financial and political support from which they come from is open to debate. What is clear is that whilst clear differences in civil, social and market rights remain so migration from less well off states will continue. These in itself creates a problem for nations, as their existing citizens may not welcome new immigrants and feel threatened by them, which could create racial tensions. This is always more evident when a country is experiencing economic problems, as in recent years.

In the UK however as David Cesarani points out “the British lack a clear-cut nationality, or citizenship with rights and duties attached to it which are easily ascertainable.”(7) Citizenship in the UK has until recent years taken a back seat to that of nationality and patriotism as historically membership of the nation depended on ownership of land, which was considered the ultimate

in loyalty to the Monarch. So in the UK subjecthood and not citizenship was key. As time progressed the state conferred certain rights such as voting on its people not as a concept of citizenship but as a reward for their loyalty to their country and often to benefit government not the people. The 1914 British Nationality Act declared, “that all inhabitants of the dominions and colonies owed allegiance to the crown and were therefore, British subjects.”(8) As stated earlier not all subjects had rights of entry to a particular dominion or colony. So in the UK nationality was more important than citizenship and neither was considered to be closely related.

In the modern era it appears that we are moving towards a form of global citizenship where nationality seems less important. As Western style democracies increase in number the idea of transferable rights from one nation to another are increasing such as the right to life and liberty. Aside from the EU where citizenship and nationality are becoming less locked together in terms of state boundaries more and more countries are embracing rights for citizens from voting and legal rights where the individual is protected by laws enshrined in the state such as in South Africa. This kind of citizenship could be described as supranational citizenship but even this is giving way in some part to a regional form of citizenship. This is where a part or region of a country has gained rights to autonomy in addition to those rights imparted by the central government. A good example of this is in the UK where the newly created Welsh, Scottish and Northern Ireland Assembly’s provide many of the

functions of government based on the needs of a region rather than a nation-state. Some areas such as defence and foreign policy remain in the control of central government, for example this is also the case in the USA where each individual state rules itself except on issues which affect the entire nation-state.

There also exists now a notion of state building and thus the creation of citizens rights in countries where previously they did not exist. State building is controversial as has been seen in the Balkans and now in Afghanistan. This is because it places what could be interpreted as Western values onto other states, so rather than developing any kind of individual citizenship and its associated rights Afghanistan’s new constitution has been imposed on it for the benefit of its people. Whether this form of citizenship enriches a state or nationality remains to be seen, but it could simply be seen in some quarters as another form of Imperial colonialism. Islam the dominant religion of much of the Arab world, which includes Afghanistan, is clearly developed with the individual citizen of Islam at its core as it is based on an individuals interpretation of the Koran, its holy book. For this religion it is the faith and not the nationality of the individual, which is important so this is an example of a weak relationship between nationality and citizenship. Islam does not see women or non-muslims as equals to men and this poses a problem for those in the West who want to introduce universal rights via a newly written

constitution and this may lead to further conflict not between nations or citizens but between ideologies.

In conclusion the notion of nationality is gradually being eroded and it will possibly be replaced by strong regions within nation-states, which in turn are inside groupings of countries such as exists within the EU. It will however still be entwined with citizenship and will in some ways be inseparable from it. The world has gone to war on many occasions throughout history to fight for freedom and the rights of man in the name of nationalism and threats made to it. Citizenship is no longer considered to be for the benefit for the wealthy individual or nation, but as an aspiration for millions of people. As regionalism spreads nationality will become less important than the role of citizenship, but that event is still a long way off so for the time being the relationship between the two will remain a strong one but citizenship and its associated rights will possibly become far more important than nationality which will possibly be over taken by regionalism.

References

http://www.lectlaw.com/def2/n033.htm
Van Steenbergen, B. The Condition of Citizenship Sage, London, UK 1994 (p22)
Faulks, K. Citizenship Routledge, London, UK 2000 (p29)
Van Steenbergen, B. The Condition of Citizenship Sage, London, UK 1994 (p23)
http://www.europa.eu.int/abc/rights_en.htm
Cesarani, D. Citizenship, Nationality and Migration in Europe Routledge, London, UK 1996 (p57)
Cesarani, D. Citizenship, Nationality and Migration in Europe Routledge, London, UK 1996 (p63)

Bibliography

Sources used as background material but not directly referenced.

Cesarani, D. Citizenship, Nationality and Migration in Europe Routledge, London, UK 1996
Van Steenbergen, B. The Condition of Citizenship Sage, London, UK 1994
Faulks, K. Citizenship Routledge, London, UK 2000
Einhorn, B et al Citizenship and Democratic Control in Contemporary Europe Elgar, Cheltenham, UK 1996
Smith, A Nations and Nationalism in a Global Era Polity Press, Cambridge, UK1996