Statelessness in the EU

Both the Declaration of the Rights of Man and The Universal Declaration of Human Rights explore the idea of how government enables and preserves its citizen’s rights to pursue the good life. No longer can individuals live outside the borders of a country, in which they would be considered truly free, therefore, it is the responsibility of the government to ensure that they are granted full rights and can live as if they were free. Put aptly in the Declaration of the Rights of Man, “The aim of all political association is the preservation of the natural and imprescriptible rights of man”. Without the rights warranted in these two documents the good life would be unattainable.

Citizenship is the legal status of an individual living within a particular country. Having citizenship gives people rights and responsibilities as well as a sense of belonging to a community. Citizenship can influence the lives of people as it gives people a sense of identity and how to live their life.

By birth, all humans are given the basic right to an identity. It tells people who we are, and sometimes, tell the owner who they are. However, some countries even take this necessity away. In the United States of America, despite all of its flaws, gives her citizens these basic rights. Some of these rights are the freedom of speech, freedom of religion, freedom to petition the government, right to bear arms, and civil trial by jury. Many countries, unfortunately, do not even give their residents these rights.

Substantive citizenship involves pressing issues relating to equality of rights and opportunities; treatment and life condition; and, not least, participatory involvement that ought to come from holding formal citizenship…In short, being a citizen is no guarantee of equality; real equality is hampered by inequalities resulting from membership in stigmatized and minoritized groups.

Modern rights and duties of citizenship are relatively young and their relevance largely depends on whether the citizen is situated

As an American citizen I have a responsibility to this country. Does following these simple rules make me a true citizen? I say yes, it does, as I will continue to explain. If I was to do more, what I will do to better myself in participating in citizen responsibilities? Questions, in my opinion, are practically impossible to answer for numerous explanations. It is very hard to come up with a concrete answer as why do we need to do more to be a true citizen utilizing our citizenship, and what is demanded of us. However, my main point of this paper is to outline what a true citizen is to me and citizenship from my views, personal beliefs, personal experiences, and readings of “Citizenship: A Very Short Introduction by: Richard Bellamy” that includes other viewpoints of the correct meaning of a true

“Citizenship has meant membership in one's community” being a citizen is being part of a nation, and it is included in making decisions, have privileges and advantage on the community that we form a part. Moreover, be a citizen is a legal designation, which gives us rights and duties with our nation. Rights that let us be free for involved in social, cultural, governmental, economic, and political inside a community. Duties, which give us responsibilities with our country like the vote and be kept under the law. Citizens have a protection and support from the government that help us to form a life in their nation.

Is it lawful to be deprived of nationality, where it would leave a person no rights or protection as national, having no identity and not considered to belong anywhere? If a person does not have a nationality by any country then the person would be stateless. Statelessness is a massive problem which is estimated to affect 600,000 people alone in Europe. People in this circumstance lack access to health care, education, employment opportunities, property rights and the ability to freely move around across borders. Practitioners argued that depriving a person of a nationality is a violation of human rights but some governments state that Citizenship is privilege, not a right. Following on from this, a critical discussion will be made on whether Immigration Act 2014 s.66 complies with the European Union regarding the issue of statelessness. The decision in Al-Jedda will be analysed and show the impact it has had on UK policy.

It was argued that these tensions originate from the conflicting values upon which human rights and democracy were distinctly founded, the ways in which they are applied and the kinds of politics that they make room for. The careful juggling between the preservation of democratic institutions and the protection of human rights will thus remain shaky, even in the best of times. These tensions have risen out of the rift between liberal democracy’s conceptualization of the universal Man and the national citizen, or rather, “the real beneficiary of rights” (Douzinas 2013, 56). Since rights form the basis upon which people are allocated into rulers, ruled, and excluded, it is hard to imagine a utopia in which human rights exist for those who do not belong to a demos (Douzinas 2013,

Citizenship tends to give an individual a membership in a national community. In terms of liberal democracies, it makes them have the right to; take part freely in public activities, run for an office, and the right to vote; on the other hand the individual has the obligation of paying tax. Based on the larger international community, citizenship forms a powerful media of social closure in two ways: the boundary of citizenship paves way for rich states to draw a line separating its citizens from potential immigrants who are from poor countries. In another way, it provide a base that states use to create internal boundaries that is separating citizens from foreign residents, in terms of associating some given rights and privileges with national citizenship.

This article is relevant in the context of increasing global concern over human rights. More recent debates in international relations discuss the importance of the individual over that of states and sovereignty, especially in a society in which national and global boundaries are being transcended and constantly undermined. Multiple levels

“Citizenship policies and ideas of nationhood in Scandinavia” discusses immigration policies in Scandinavian countries. It gives examples on how the Scandinavian countries have reviewed and looked at policies from 19th century until today. In the first part, I will discuss citizenship in the three countries, in the second part I will argue around the topic of language requirements and national identity. The whole will end in a conclusion about how different the countries are in terms of renewal of policies and integration. This essay will aim to look at the articles key contribution and discuss the main arguments straights and weaknesses.

Citizenship is highly coveted in many nations, so coveted in fact that through only a few processes can one become a citizen for most nations, might that process be natural birth or naturalization. Citizenship and its privileges were also highly valued in Rome, except becoming a citizen was extremely difficult if not impossible. Roman citizenship also leads to assassinations and war within the Italian peninsula. There is a complex history to Roman citizenship.

The European Union (EU) is not a typical international organization. The mix of intergovernmental and supranational institutions makes the EU a unique, distinctive political, and economic system. As Europe has spiraled from one crisis to the next, difficult discussions haves arisen about how much more power should be delegated to Brussels. Even though the EU advocates for “ever closer union”, through increased integration, states are becoming hesitant to relinquish power to the EU. This is due to the fact that state sovereignty has become threatened; it is being compromised by a combination of the lack of effective democratic institutions and the loss of states have lost control of law-making to legislation power to EU institutions. Euroenthuthiasts argue that state sovereignty is enhanced, not threatened, by reallocating power to EU institutions. However, Eurosceptics dispute that too much control has seceded to the EU making is a threat to state sovereignty. My position aligns with Eurosceptics, for the EU has weakened state sovereignty do to increased centralization of power in EU institutions that lack legitimacy. The European Project has obtained a copious amount of jurisdiction from states and eroded a basic fundamental freedom of the modern state- sovereignty. Since the EU has with goals to deepen and widen integration it’s clear that forfeiting state sovereignty will only intensify. My essay will start with a brief history of the European Union and a short

Nationality and citizenship are central components of human security on the grounds that they give individuals a feeling of having a place and personality. They give a legitimate premise to the activity of numerous human rights. Persons without a nationality are in numerous nations denied various human rights that natives underestimate, in the same way those people lacked from human basic rights, such as access to schools and therapeutic consideration, responsibility for, marriage and establishment of a family and delight in legitimate assurance. All around the world, unfortunately an expected 15 million individuals are viewed as stateless.