The withdrawal of citizenship and its implications under international conventions on the prevention of statelessness, with special reference to the case of Shamima Begum

Abstract

The right to nationality is expressly guaranteed under the Universal Declaration of Human Rights as a basic human right, applying to every person by virtue of them being human. Studies have shown, however, that millions of people around the world are being deprived or denied access to this right, rendering them stateless. There have been a number of international conventions and campaigns which have been specifically established with the aim of preventing and reducing the staggering amount of global statelessness. Despite such international efforts, due to the fact that nationality law falls within the remit of a State’s sovereignty, it remains up to the State to expressly include the principles enunciated within the international frameworks into its internal law, which is not always a successful exercise. The lack of adequacy within the internal laws of certain States to protect stateless individuals has brought about a surge of reliance on international human rights for a degree of protection. The European Court of Human Rights, in particular, has undertaken to widening its interpretation of the European Convention of Human Rights for this purpose. Despite the fact that this approach is not always successful, it reflects a willingness on the part of the Court to provide the necessary protection to this vulnerable population. The issue of statelessness gained significant traction in 2019, after the international media reported of the British Government’s decision to revoke the British citizenship of Shamima Begum after she left the United Kingdom to become a member of an extremist group, rendering her stateless. This case brought about heavy discussion amongst academics on the principle for protection against statelessness and its limitations.