Highlights

image1

European Citizenship at the Crossroads


This book examines the changing role played by the European Union and international standards on loss and acquisition of nationality. It provides a comparative analysis of EU Member States regulations, administrative practices, court rulings and statistical data on questions related to loss of nationality and European citizenship. It assesses the multifaceted repercussions of the supranational venues of judicial and legal accountability over states autonomy and competences at times of deciding who is and who is not a citizen. The following questions are examined: to what the extent do EU Member States still hold the exclusive competence over domestic decisions in nationality matters? How do international and European legal principles and standards, as well as case-law by European courts progressively affect their margin of manoeuvre at times of deciding who is and who is not a ‘citizen’? What are the repercussions of their obligations in safeguarding citizenship of the Union? List of contents Preface 
   Gerard-René de Groot and Sergio Carrera Nuñez
About the Authors 
Abbreviations 
List of Tables and Figures 
Foreword 

   Zeta Georgiadou PART I: LOSS AND QUASI-LOSS OF NATIONALITY IN THE EU
Chapter 1 
Introduction: European Citizenship at a Crossroads
   Sergio Carrera Nuñez and Gerard-René de Groot
Chapter 2 
Survey on Rules on Loss of Nationality in International
Treaties and Case Law
   Gerard-René de Groot
Chapter 3 
A Comparative Analysis of Regulations on Involuntary
Loss of Nationality in the European Union
   Gerard-René de Groot and Maarten Peter Vink
Chapter 4
Reflections on Quasi-Loss of Nationality from
Comparative, International and European Perspectives
   Gerard-René de Groot and Patrick Wautelet
Chapter 5 
Mapping Statistics on Loss of Nationality in the EU:
A New Online Database
   Maarten Peter Vink and Ngo Chun Luk PART II: NATIONAL PERSPECTIVES AND DEVELOPMENTS
Chapter 6
Loss of Nationality in the Nordic Countries 185
   Eva Ersbøll
Chapter 7 
Deprivation of Citizenship:
The Latvian Example and EU Perspective
   Kristine Kruma
Chapter 8 
Is it Possible to Lose the Hungarian Nationality?
   Judit Tóth
Chapter 9 
Iberian Nationality Legislation and Sephardic Jews:
‘With due regard to European law’?
   Hans Ulrich Jessurun d’Oliveira
Chapter 10 
Attribution of Spanish Nationality to Children Born in Spain with the
Purpose of Avoiding Situations of Statelessness at Birth.
   Aurelia Álvarez Rodríguez and Guayasén
   Marrero González
Chapter 11 
How Much Does EU Citizenship Cost? The Maltese Citizenship-for-Sale
Affair: A Breakthrough for Sincere Cooperation in Citizenship of the Union?
   Sergio Carrera Nuñez PART III
ROTTMANN IN THE COURTS OF THE MEMBER STATES OF THE EUROPEAN UNION:
A collection of judgements, pending cases and caselaw notes 1. AUSTRIA
Gerard-René de Groot
1.1. CASE 1: An Austrian husband of Macedonian origin 
1.1.1. Text of the judgement 
1.1.2. Case Note 
1.2. CASE 2: An Austrian wife of Nigerian origin 
1.2.1. Text of the judgement 
1.2.2. Case Note 
1.3. CASE 3: An Austrian husband of Turkish origin 
1.3.1. Text of the judgement 
1.3.2. Case Note  2. BELGIUM
   Patrick Wautelet
2.1. CASE 4: Two Belgian children born in China 
2.1.1. Text of the judgement 
2.1.2. Case Note  3. CYPRUS
   Nicoletta Charalambidou
3.1. CASE 5 
3.1.1. Text of the judgement 
3.1.2. Case Note  4. DENMARK
   Eva Ersbøll
4.1. PENDING CASE 
4.1.1. Case description  5. GERMANY
   Gerard-René de Groot
5.1. CASE 6: The fate of Janko Rottmann 
5.1.1. Text of the judgement 
5.1.2. Case Note 
5.2. CASE 7: A German with Turkish roots 
5.2.1. Text of the judgement 
5.2.2. Case Note  6. LATVIA
   Kristine Kruma
6.1. CASE 8: A Latvian with a Russian background 
6.1.1. Text of the judgement: Court of First Instance 
6.1.2. Text of the judgement: Latvian Supreme Court 
6.1.3. Case Note  7. MALTA
   Daniela DeBono
7.1. CASE 9 
7.1.1. Text of the judgements: First Hall of the Constitutional Court 
7.1.2. Text of the judgements: Court of Appeals of the Constitutional Court 
7.1.3. Case Note  8. THE NETHERLANDS
   Ngo Chun Luk
8.1. Combined Case Note 
8.2. CASE 10: Parental error 
8.3. CASE 11: Syrian, not Iraqi 
8.4. CASE 12: Unintentional fraud 
8.5. CASE 13: Fictitious parentage 
8.6. CASE 14: Bigamous Egyptian 
8.7. CASE 15: Hidden criminal antecedents 
8.8. CASE 16: Identity fraud in Limburg 
8.9. Final Remarks 
8.10. Text of Judgments  9. THE NETHERLANDS
   Gerard-René de Groot
9.1. PENDING CASE 2: Dutch twins? 
9.1.1. Case description  10. SPAIN
   Guayasén Marrero González
10.1. CASE 17: Temporary residence permit on the grounds of exceptional circumstances (social         integration)
10.1.1. Text of the judgement 
10.1.2. Case Note  11. UNITED KINGDOM
11.1. PENDING CASE 3: A British Vietnamese involved in terrorism? 
11.1.1. Appeal: Court of Appeal of England and Wales 
11.1.2. Final appeal: Supreme Court – case description  12. EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS
   Gerard-René de Groot
12.1. PENDING CASE 4: A Maltese husband of Egyptian origin 
12.1.1. Case description 
12.1.2. Comments 

ANNEX 1.
Guidelines Involuntary Loss of European Citizenship (ILEC Guidelines 2015) 
Gerard-René de Groot, Maarten Peter Vink and Patrick Wautelet REFERENCES AND SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY 
 

Forthcoming Publications

image1

Civis europaeus sum?
Guayasén Marrero González

Civis europaeus sum? Am I a citizen of the Union? This question, which is the cornerstone of this thesis, is also the question that people affected by an eventual State succession within an EU Member State need an answer to. The link between the nationality of an EU Member State and citizenship of the Union is, as it stands now, unbreakable. One cannot claim the enjoyment of the latter without holding the nationality of an EU Member State. Thus, those who, due to the operation of the State succession and the rules enacted in that context regarding nationality, lose the nationality of the predecessor-EU Member State cannot invoke “civis europaeus sum”. From the outset, individuals who lose the nationality of an EU Member State would lose EU citizenship and the rights attached to it. However, whilst EU citizenship is still not autonomous from Member State nationality, certain rights associated to the residence in both the potential newly independent States and the EU Member States can be frozen as an interim solution until such times as the former has completed the EU accession process.

image1

Ethical Realism and the Rule of Law
Dennis Paling

On 5th June 1989 an unknown man stopped the leading tank in a column entering Tiananmen Square, Beijing. His ultimate fate is unknown. His courage reflects the dilemma of brave people faced by the force of authority. The rule of law attempts to control excess of authority, but is often ineffective and illusory.   Realist jurisprudence acknowledges that the law is often flawed and unfairly administered and that the rule of law is an illusion. This book discusses the question what then should the individual do? It suggests that ethical realism is a wise approach: acknowledging that in reality the law is flawed, but attempting when possible to do what ethics suggest, applying the classical concept of internal or virtue ethics.   This approach has practical applications – it would be ethical to have a 2 state solution in the Middle East as was resolved by the UN General Assembly in 1947; it would be ethical for the UK to remain in the EEA established by the Treaty of Rome after 48.7% of UK voters wanted to remain and when the 2016 referendumand 2017 legislation referred only to the EU.   In the early 1960s I attended the realist jurisprudence lectures at Oxford and came away with a belief that the rule of law is an ideal rather than a reality but a belief that ethics encourage the individual to do what can be done in practice to alleviate failures of the rule of law.

image1

WTO Law on Export Restrictions on Trade in Goods
Kelly Kuan Shang

This book examines a theoretical question which has been heavily debated due to its social relevance: is current WTO law sufficient to regulate export restrictions?   This book systematically reviews the law of the World Trade Organization (WTO) concerning export restrictions, guided by the principles of treaty interpretation and the WTO case law. Possibly contrary to the predominant view, this book respectfully submits that current WTO law is sufficient in regulating export restrictions; it is also capable of balancing the general disciplines of export restrictions and the various non-trade values.   A highlight of this book is its use of a range of case studies. These case studies deal with, inter alia, Hong Kong’s export ban of baby milk formula, the European Union’s economic sanctions against Russia, as well as New Zealand’s export quality requirement for wine, single export desk requirement for kiwifruits, and export ban of certain minerals with spiritual values. Analysis of these case studies revealed several underexplored types of export restrictions, and further demonstrated the possible relevance of a number of WTO provisions which have not yet been invoked before the WTO adjudicators.   Kelly Kuan Shang is a PhD Researcher at Maastricht University. She received a JD from the University of Hong Kong (St John’s College). She is admitted to practice law in Australia and New Zealand. Her research interests are international trade law and public international law.

Recent Publications

image1

Volume I - Cultural Diplomacy: Waging War by other Means
F.A.M. Alting von Geusau

The peaceful collapse of the Soviet totalitarian, communist system has been a watershed of historic proportions in Europe and the world. In 1989, unexpectedly, Communism and the Cold War were behind us, they were bad and should be forgotten. The immediate post-1989 world presented itself as a new era of organised forgetting, as neither East nor West were interested in examining the prolonged period of acquiescence in absurdities. The Berlin Wall, paramount symbol of absurdity, had to be erased from the face of the earth and the memory of the people. Only much later have we become aware how much the heritage of repression and division still dominates our thinking. The principal organisations of Western and European cooperation have been enlarged Eastward, but the fruits of peaceful, spiritual revolution have turned sour. Far too little has changed for the better and far too many old habits have survived. For the question asked in this volume: Is bilateral cultural diplomacy waging war with other means? There still is no good answer. The surprise of 1989 has apparently paralyzed policies thereafter. Despite resounding declarations and non-binding resolutions on a new order, there was no vision, no strategy and no clear purpose. The basic approach was “more of the same”. Cultural diplomacy had no priority and budgets were cut in Germany, the United Kingdom and the United States. Since the successful and peaceful revolution in 1989 ended the division of Europe and the bipolar nuclear stalemate, we collectively entered the brave new world of organised forgetting. Nevertheless, the footprints of that past century are still all around. This series is intended to identify, to explain and to remember, because the more things are said to change, the more things appear to remain the same. We must therefore learn from history if only to avoid repeating a few of the blunders of the past century. Prof. Jhr.Dr. Frans A.M.Alting von Geusau (1933) is professor (em.) of International Law and Western Cooperation at Tilburg University and Leiden University.

image1

Footprints of the 20th Century - Third Edition
F.A.M. Alting von Geusau

Since 1989, we refer to the whole post-war period as the “Cold War Era”. Such was not the case in 1968. At the time, the Cold War – in our perception – was behind us. We no longer felt to be in the midst of it. Europeans on the Western side of the Iron Curtain0 felt relatively at ease with Europe’s division. The era of Détente as we called it, was0 considered to be a fairly stable and long-lasting political condition, even after Soviet tanks crushed Dubcek’s socialism with a human face in Prague.
A strange year it was… 1968. Academic interest was focused on the war in Vietnam, non-proliferation of nuclear weapons, the French Gaullist challenge to the European Communities and the student revolt in Paris. The Western democracies promoted the process of détente on the basis of three political illusions. They assumed that common institutions between East and West would generate a sense of common interest in European security, facilitating negotiated solutions of outstanding problems. They expected East-West economic cooperation to promote reform from above in the East, towards more open societies. They hoped to foster democracy and respect for human
rights through cooperation in the cultural and human dimension. By 1989 all three of them had proven to be illusions. The end of the Soviet system came as a complete surprise to most politicians and to all Western advocates of détente in the Nineteen Eighties. The so-called dissidents won a peaceful victory over the one-party, repressive regimes in the East and helped to end the post-war division of Europe. Obviously, neither the (now former) communists nor the advocates of détente ever admitted their wrong. So they went all into the business of proclaiming a new era as a continuation of the old one. The greatest catastrophe of the Twentieth Century was Lenin`s creation of totalitarian Soviet Russia at the end of the Great War and not its collapse at the end0 of the Cold War, as president Putin said in 2005. This volume particularly challenges the past illusions of détente and the present approach of organized forgetting the past.
Since the successful and peaceful revolution in 1989 ended the division of Europe and the bipolar nuclear stalemate, we collectively entered the brave new world of organised forgetting. Nevertheless, the footprints of that past century are still all around. This0 series is intended to identify, to explain and to remember, because the more things are0 said to change, the more things appear to remain the same. We must therefore learn from history if only to avoid repeating a few of the blunders of the past century.
Prof. Jhr.Dr. Frans A.M.Alting von Geusau (1933) is professor (em.) of International Law and Western Cooperation at Tilburg University and Leiden University.  

image1

Footprints of the 20th Century - Third Edition
F.A.M. Alting von Geusau

The story of European Unification is fascinating. In 1950, two sworn enemies – France and Germany – decide to seek reconciliation and European federal unity. As a first step, they created the European Coal and Steel Community together with Italy and the Benelux countries. The fathers of this new Europe were visionary persons. Does today`s student or scholar still know who Robert Schuman, Konrad Adenauer, Alcide de Gasperi or Willem Beyen were and what they stood for? At the time, the United Kingdom refused the invitation to join such a federal project. Under American pressure they asked for admission in 1961, entered in 1973 without ever accepting the federal project and decided to leave in March 2017 after a small majority voted for Brexit in June 2016. What began as a process of reconciliation between two enemies – France and Germany – became a peaceful enlargement of the European Union to twenty-eight Member States. The division of Europe between a Soviet dominated East and a Euro-Atlantic West is no more. This volume not only tells a success story. It also makes us understand why after more than sixty years the Germans lack the solidarity and the French the political vision to turn the Euro-crisis into true progress towards unity. Against the background of Europe`s long and turbulent history, this book may also help to understand why it is so difficult to overcome nationalism and to practice the virtue of solidarity so central to the Christian source of Europe as a civilization. Since the successful and peaceful revolution in 1989 ended the division of Europe and the bipolar nuclear stalemate, we collectively entered the brave new world of organised forgetting. Nevertheless, the footprints of that past century are still all around. This series is intended to identify, to explain and to remember, because the more things are said to change, the more things appear to remain the same. We must therefore learn from history if only to avoid repeating a few of the blunders of the past century. Prof. Jhr.Dr. Frans A.M.Alting von Geusau (1933) is professor (em.) of International Law and Western Cooperation at Tilburg University and Leiden University.

webdesign by Robiz.nl Webdesign & Webhosting Oisterwijk