Why a campaign to end statelessness matters

Dear friends and colleagues,

It is not easy to imagine what life would be like if you did not hold any nationality. In fact, it is not easy to even imagine this even being possible. Everyone has a birthplace, a family, a home, a community: surely everyone has a nationality? Sadly, no. Millions of people around the world are stateless. They are perpetual foreigners, disenfranchised, not recognised as or able to exercise the rights of citizens in any country. This is a serious problem – for those affected, but also for those of us who do enjoy a nationality and can make a difference, as people who care about and want our children to grow up in a free, fair, safe and democratic world.

We welcome, admire and support the ambitious campaign launched today by the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) to end statelessness by 2024. Statelessness fundamentally and unequivocally deserves more attention than it has received to date and the time has come for it to take its rightful place amongst other pressing and worrying issues that are already vying for international attention. We are not powerless in the face of statelessness. Citizenship is our own modern-day creation and we set the rules. Bad laws can be amended. Discriminatory policies can be repealed. We believe that with greater awareness of the issue, stronger collaboration and a firm commitment to act, statelessness can be solved. Indeed, we not only believe that statelessness can be tackled, we believe that it must. Statelessness matters, to all of us, for many reasons. Here are just some of them…

If people matter…

Stateless persons are among the world’s most vulnerable. They are seen and treated as foreigners by every country in the world, including the country in which they were born, the country of their ancestors, the country of their residence, the country they happen to find themselves in today and any country they may find themselves expelled to tomorrow. Stateless persons face an extreme form of exclusion that impacts their sense of dignity and identity, as well as their ability to do all sorts of everyday things that most of us take for granted, like go to school, get a job, be treated by a doctor, get married or travel. So, if people matter, statelessness matters.

If children matter…

Many of the world’s stateless persons are children. In fact, in every region of the world, children continue to be born into statelessness and grow up never knowing the protection and recognition that comes with a nationality. Some children inherit their statelessness from stateless parents, creating an intergenerational problem. Others aren’t able to acquire their parents’ or any other nationality due to discriminatory laws and policies or the failure of governments to implement simple legal safeguards that prevent childhood statelessness. Without a nationality, children can have difficulty exercising their rights, become outcasts in their own country, struggle to feel like they belong and grow up to be disenfranchised and excluded adults. So, if children matter, statelessness matters.

If human rights matter…

The contemporary human rights framework is premised on notions of equality, liberty, dignity and universality: we all hold basic rights because we are human beings. But the human rights system also recognises that states may reserve some rights for their citizens, such as the right to vote or be elected, placing these out of reach for stateless people. And in practice, statelessness is a proven barrier to the exercise a wide range of other rights. So the very universality of human right rests on the premise that everyone enjoys a nationality – laid down, for that reason, as a right in most major human rights instruments. Until statelessness is eradicated, the fundamental aspiration of universal human rights remains just that, an aspiration. So, if human rights matter, statelessness matters.

If development matters…

Difficulties accessing education and employment; restricted property rights; lack of opportunities to own or register a business; limited access to a bank account or a loan; and, in some cases, the threat of extortion, detention or expulsion; these factors can trap stateless persons in poverty and make it extremely challenging for them to improve their circumstances. Where statelessness affects whole communities over several successive generations – as it often sadly does – such communities can be neglected by development actors and processes. Statelessness means a waste, of individual potential, of human capital and of development opportunities. So, if development matters, statelessness matters.

If democracy matters…

Nationality is the gateway to political participation. Stateless persons have no right to vote, stand for election or effect change through regular political channels. Their statelessness suppresses their voices and renders their opinions obsolete. In countries with large stateless populations, whole sectors of the constituency are disenfranchised. Elsewhere, statelessness is a tool in the arsenal of those who would seek to manipulate the democratic process, with deprivation of nationality a means of silencing the opposition. To ensure a level and inclusive democratic playing field, stateless persons must also be heard. So, if democracy matters, statelessness matters.

If addressing displacement matters…

Statelessness is a recognised root cause of forced displacement, with stateless persons fleeing their homes and often countries in order to find protection elsewhere. Preventing cases of statelessness is vital for the prevention of refugee flows – a link that has been a key motivation for UNHCR to further operationalise its statelessness mandate and now call to end statelessness. Addressing nationality disputes and tackling statelessness where it arises can also be a key tool in resolving existing refugee situations because it can pave the way for successful voluntary repatriation and reintegration. So, if addressing displacement matters, statelessness matters.

If peace and security matter…

The vulnerability, exclusion, despair, frustration and sometimes persecution experienced by stateless persons can spark other problems. Casting a group as “others” or “outsiders” by denying them access to nationality – in spite of clear and lasting ties to the country – can contribute to attitudes of suspicion and discrimination. This can cause a dangerous build-up of tension within and between communities that may lead to conflict. Disputes surrounding nationality, membership, belonging and entitlement can also hamper peace-building efforts. So, if peace and security matter, statelessness matters.

If size matters…

Many millions of people are affected by statelessness around the world today. UNHCR estimates that there are at least 10 million stateless persons under its mandate and if stateless refugees and stateless Palestinians under UN Relief and Works Agency mandate are added to this tally, the figure is higher still. This means that there are enough stateless persons to create a medium-sized country (although this is not suggested as a solution). Moreover, these numbers do not include the many more who feel the impact of statelessness, for instance because a close family member lacks any nationality. So, if size matters, statelessness matters.

What can you do?

The launch of the campaign led by the UNHCR to end statelessness by 2024 is a great opportunity to reach out to all individuals, communities and organisations, who have it within their capacity to help address statelessness. Please take a moment to reflect on statelessness and its many impacts. Is it relevant to your field of work? Does it affect people in your country? Do people near you experience the vulnerability and exclusion of statelessness?

Sign up to UNHCR’s #ibelong campaign to end statelessness: http://ibelong.unhcr.org/. Start a conversation, discuss the issue, raise awareness and try to use your position and expertise to help. Share this note on ‘Why Statelessness Matters’ with people in your network; watch and share this short video too. If you would like to learn more about statelessness, if you want to do something but are not sure what, or if you are looking for partners to collaborate with, get in touch with us and we will try to help.  If you think your organisation can better integrate statelessness into its work but would like to brainstorm ideas to make this happen, we will support you. If you want to further study the link between your field of expertise and statelessness, we welcome your plans. Together, we can end statelessness. We can also, in the interim, protect and include the stateless. This issue matters.

Amal de Chickera, Laura van Waas and Zahra Albarazi – Founders of the Institute on Statelessness and Inclusion

The Institute on Statelessness and Inclusion is a newly established, independent non-profit organisation dedicated to leading an integrated, inter-disciplinary response to the injustice of statelessness and exclusion. In December 2014, the Institute will release its first publication, “The World’s Stateless”, assessing the challenge of ending statelessness by 2024 by taking a closer look at what we know (and what we don’t know) about who is stateless and where. To find out more or support the Institute’s work, please visit www.InstituteSI.org or contact us at info@InstituteSI.org.  

UNHCR 2014 Statelessness Research Award interviews... Maria Jose Recalde Vela

"The vulnerability of stateless persons to all sorts of human rights violations made me want to somehow help make their situation a little bit better. What I find so heart-breaking about statelessness is precisely the impact this phenomenon has on the individual’s identity: being told you do not belong in the place you identify with can be devastating, as it can make one question who one really is." 

In this series of blog posts, we are asking the students honoured in this year's UNHCR Award for Statelessness Research about their experiences studying the phenomenon on statelessness and their research findings. Third in the series is Ms. Maria Jose Recalde Vela whose thesis How can identity assert a claim to citizenship? In search of a safeguard against statelessness from a legal and socio-psychological perspective.  submitted in completion of the Liberal Arts Programme at Tilburg University (the Netherlands), was chosen by the Jury as the Best Research in the Graduate Category.

Could you summarise, in 2 or 3 sentences, what your research was about?

My research was about exploring how a person’s identity develops in relation to the place and groups a person is influenced by (such as the place one grows up in and the society one grows up around) and whether this identity can somehow be used as a safeguard against statelessness.

What first got you interested in the problem of statelessness?

I first became interested in the problem of statelessness after taking the course at Tilburg University taught by Dr. van Waas during my second year of Liberal Arts and Sciences. I had never heard of stateless before; until I took the course I never even though there were people in this planet without a nationality! Nationality is something that we take for granted, so it is very shocking to find out that there’s around 10 million people without a nationality. What got me so interested in the issue is that the impact statelessness has on the individual is very deep. Stateless persons are not only deprived of basic civil and political rights such as voting for example, but are also affected at an individual and personal level. I am not sure if research has been done on this, but I am sure that statelessness has a massive impact in the individual’s mental and emotional well-being. The vulnerability of stateless persons to all sorts of human rights violations made me want to somehow help make their situation a little bit better. What I find so heart-breaking about statelessness is precisely the impact this phenomenon has on the individual’s identity: being told you do not belong in the place you identify with can be devastating, as it can make one question who one really is.

Why did you choose this particular research topic?

I always took nationality for granted, but at the same time, I was always confused by it. What was always strange is that I always felt like I am not from one single place, but from every place I have lived in. in my short years, I have lived in a few countries (so far, 4), and every time I moved to a new place I developed an attachment to that place, and I developed a feeling of belonging to that place, even if in paper it was not that way and in paper I have one nationality. I started thinking about this and while I was reading Dr. van Waas’ book I came across a section which describes what the “genuine link” is. The genuine link is the social fact of attachment of an individual with a state, and the genuine link is the basis for nationality. The ICJ described nationality as “a legal bond having as its basis a social fact of attachment, a genuine connection of existence.” So in other words, nationality is a legal reflection of this social fact of attachment between individual and state. But state not as in government; state as in, country, homeland, nation-state, etc. A place, a society. Then I started thinking how we develop these social facts of attachment with the places we live in and how this attachment shapes our identities. I felt like my identity has been heavily shaped by every country I have lived in, and this influence the places have had on my identity have contributed to my attachment to these places. I am attached to a place, I feel like I belong there, I have a social fact of attachment to this place. And what is nationality? A reflection of this social fact of attachment. If a person like me has become attached to a place and feels like she belongs there only from having lived a few years there, there is no way any state can tell me that a person who has lived his/her entire life in the same country, many times in the same area, has no social fact of attachment to that country and does not belong there. Many, if not most, stateless persons live their entire lives in the same place for a great number of reasons. However, the challenge for this was that it is not easy to prove a social fact of attachment; it is not something tangible, like a birth certificate for example. A social fact of attachment can mean anything! I thought maybe identity can help solve this problem. However, identity can also be anything! Therefore, I chose to focus on 3 socio-psychological theories that helped me to explain how a person’s identity develops in relation to the place and the society a person grows up in. while doing research, I came across an interesting principle that was proposed by Manley O Hudson: jus connectionis. I had only heard about the jus soli (law of the soil), jus sanguinis (law of blood) and jus domicili (law of residence) for nationality attribution. Jus connectionis? Never heard of it. But it caught my attention. Jus connectionis takes into consideration a person’s connections and identity for determining nationality. Jus connectionis, however, does not have the same status as jus sanguinis, jus soli and jus domicili; it is a theory, a thought, a proposal, an idea. But I thought it was definitely worth looking into, particularly since it could contribute to my search for a safeguard against statelessness.

Could you briefly describe how you went about your research? E.g. did you base it on existing sources – and were they easy to find? Did you do fieldwork or interviews – and what was that like?

I based my research 100% on existing sources; it was a literature review. Carrying out field research on this topic would be very helpful but very complicated due to language barriers and due to the fact that it would take a long time to carry out the interviews and process all the data. Therefore, I based it on all sorts of literature I was able to find. It was challenging to find the literature I needed for it, as you know, there is not much information out there on stateless persons. I was lucky to find some reports in which stateless persons described their feelings of belonging to the place where they had grown up their entire lives.

What was the greatest challenge you had to deal with in undertaking your research?

The greatest challenge was definitely finding literature, since there is not much information out there that can give us a clear view into the identities of stateless persons. One of the most difficult parts was reading and actually understanding the socio-psychological theories and being able to explain them in writing. In Liberal Arts and Sciences, I majored in law, so almost every course I took was a law course. Therefore, I was used to reading legal texts and understanding them. However, social sciences texts, particularly social psychology ones were very confusing for me! I took a few social sciences courses during my bachelor, but none on social psychology, so it was very challenging to read and understand the texts. It was also a lot of fun to get to explore an area that I found so interesting but I was very unfamiliar with.

Could you briefly summarise your main findings or conclusions – or what you think is the most important outcome of your research?

-Citizenship is the legal “confirmation” of a person’s belonging to a group; it cannot be determined simply by looking at a person (this is a rejection of ethnicity and race as the basis of citizenship). A “social fact of attachment” must be determined for citizenship to be properly attributed to an individual

-the social fact of attachment is not tangible; it is embedded in the individual’s identity, so it is important to see how this identity developed and what influenced it. The 3 theories of identity can help explain how identity develops in relation to place and group. Our identities are influenced by our surroundings and the people who surround us. It can be said that the development of our identity is influenced by the country we live in.

-the principles of jus soli and jus sanguinis, which are meant to prove membership through birth on the territory or through blood, are unable to prevent people from becoming stateless, due to strict application of these principles by some states. This strict application makes it easy to exclude people from the citizenry, even though many of these excluded persons have social facts of attachment with said state.

-the principle of jus connectionis which takes into account connections and attachment to a place fills this gap left by the jus soli and jus sanguinis principles. Therefore, the principle of jus connectionis, since it takes into account identity, could serve as a safeguard against statelessness for persons who are excluded from the citizenry since they have no legal claims to citizenship through birth or through blood but do have a claim through their social fact of attachment to their homeland.

Have you found it rewarding to research statelessness – why / why not?

I have found doing research on statelessness—and nationality—the most rewarding experience of my life. I was lucky to intern at the statelessness programme last semester and it was the best, and now I am writing my master thesis on nationality, which I absolutely love. While it focuses on nationality, the idea behind it is finding a new way to help stateless persons. Once you jump on the statelessness train, you won’t be getting off for a long time. There is still so much research to be done that you will never run out of ideas on new things to research on.

What tips would you give to students who are getting involved in statelessness research to help them? E.g. are there particular questions you think they should be looking at or methodological issues they should consider?

Find a topic you find interesting, it will make the process (it’s a long and considerably exhausting process) very enjoyable. I really hope someday someone can go out into the field and carry out interviews to find out more about the identities of the stateless individuals interviewed and maybe use some of the theoretical background I presented in my thesis and use their field results and see what happens! It would be a very large project that would benefit from an interdisciplinary approach, but if it ever happens I will definitely read that paper! I think in terms of finding concrete solutions for statelessness there is a lot of research that can be done, particularly looking into how specific countries or regions can find concrete solutions for statelessness in their territories or in the region. Theory-wise, there is so much to do! I am fascinated by the theoretical issues. For example finding the “core” of nationality, or finding concrete reasons to why this concept, which was meant to include and bond people over their belonging to a place, actually has left gaps in the law and its implementation that have rendered millions stateless. One of the problems I had was that there is not much literature out there, so any contributions to the literature are always welcome, and from any discipline! I am not an expert but I feel like statelessness cannot be addressed only from only one discipline: it is such a complex issue that it needs contributions from various disciplines for a better understanding of it, and I think that once we understand an issue it is easier to find concrete long-lasting solutions to it.

GUEST POST: Jurisprudence developed by the Supreme Court of Nepal regarding the right to Citizenship

Courts play an important role in defining law in Common law legal system. This is considered good as it is supposed to bridge a gap in law. If prevailing laws prove inadequate to address the issues at the hand, then the Court plays some proactive role to address such problems through the interpretation of the law under its jurisdiction. The rulings are based on universally accepted legal and judicial principles, norms and standards. This can also be called judicial activism.

The Nepalese Court has played a significant role in making the country’s laws clearer and in the quest of justice. The Supreme Court of Nepal, as a head of the Judiciary has been playing a particular role in setting principles and norms for the protection of people's rights. This blog discusses the jurisprudence developed by the Supreme Court of Nepal regarding the interpretation of nationality law and constitutional provisions relating to nationality/citizenship, against the backdrop of international human rights law. Since, citizenship has been remained as one of the most contentious issues in Nepal for a long time, this piece aims to shed light on some positive aspects of the developments in this regard. 

One leading case related with discrimination against women to confer nationality to her daughter is centre-stage in this blog: the 27 February 2011 decision of the Supreme Court in the petition Sabina Damai v. Government of Nepal et. al., Writ No. 067-WO-0703 of the year 2067 BS (2010 AD).

Fact of the case:

Ms. Sabina Damai is a daughter of Ms. Gangamaya Damai but her father is still unknown. Ms. Gangamaya Damai left her birthplace Dolkha district (one of Nepal’s 75 districts) at the age of 22 and came to the capital city Kathmandu in search of employment. There, she became pregnant and gave birth to a daughter called Sabina. Ms. Gangamaya doesn't know who the father of her daughter is, as she had a sexual relationship with different men at that time.

When Sabina reached an age of 18 years (eligible age for citizenship is 16 years), she submitted an application to the District Administration Office (DAO) in Dolkha to get a citizenship certificate – this being the place where her mother is from and Sabina claiming the citizenship certificate by descent. But the Chief District Officer (CDO) denied her the citizenship certificate on the ground that her father is unknown and rejected her application through verbal notice.

Summary of the Court's Ruling:

In a writ petition filed by Ms. Sabina Damai, she asks for the court to review the decision by the Chief District Officer (CDO) to reject her application for a citizenship certificate and to order the Government of Nepal to issue such a certificate. She claimed that she was denied the citizenship certificate despite of fulfilling all of the requirements set by the law.

The Supreme Court maintained that citizenship certificates have a vital importance for every person. The citizenship certificate identifies one as a citizen of a country. It is also a prerequisite to enjoy civil, political as well as economic rights. One must qualify under the laws and constitution of Nepal as a citizen, in order to get a citizenship certificate.

Since Article 13 of the Interim Constitution of Nepal 2063 (2007) guarantees the right to equality, which means all of the citizens are equal before the law regardless of their sex, gender and other statuses Therefore women should not be the subject of discrimination at all, in issues relating to the citizenship certificates as well. In fact, the court stated, the law clearly provides that it is the right of the child to get a citizenship certificate in the name of mother who is already a citizen of Nepal, in case of unidentified father or missing one, as per article 8(2) of the Interim Constitution of Nepal. The court maintained that it is the fundamental as well as human rights of the child to get her nationality from mother.

In its ruling, the court also pointed out that Nepal is a State party to the Convention on Rights of Children (CRC), which provides that every child has right to nationality and his/her best interest, should be protected. As such, the court concluded, the Government of Nepal is bound to respect its commitments towards child rights and observe the treaty obligations.

On the basis of these considerations, the court ruled that since available evidence and proof establish that Gangamaya Damai, mother of Sabina Damai (the plaintiff) is a Nepali citizen by descent, and Sabina Damai has also born in Nepal, Sabina is entitled to get a Nepalese citizenship certificate by descent in accordance with the prevailing citizenship laws, as well as constitution of Nepal. The Supreme Court then ordered the District Administration Office of Dolkha to provide a citizenship certificate to the applicant.

Conclusion:

The above decision of the Supreme Court has major significance to the situation in Nepal for three reasons: i) in maintaining gender justice; ii) providing citizenship certificates to the thousands of eligible children whose father are missing/unknown; and iii) observing the treaty obligations and reducing statelessness. More importantly, in its ruling, the Court indicated the need for the state to adopt essential measures in addressing the problem of citizenship certificate as well as statelessness in Nepal.

In its verdict, the Supreme Court has emphasized on the principle of equality before the law as well as the right to nationality for all. In addition, it reaffirmed the principle of non-discrimination which includes the right to equal protection of the law for women and children, regardless of their status in society. Furthermore the Court added that it is the duty of the State to abolish all forms of ill and inhuman tradition and practices, customs, etc. against women through the enactment of proper laws. The traditional and conservative mindset which considers women as inferior to men need to be changed. Being two sides of the same coin, men and women are equal  in dignity and rights.

Today, the letter of the law doesn't restrict a woman from conferring citizenship to her children [(Article 8 (3) of Nepal Citizenship Act 2006]. However, it is not a well accepted practice in Nepal – that of granting citizenship in the name of mother, by descent. By descent is always interpreted to mean from the father or male, reflecting the still largely patriarchal mindset in society. Indeed, the criteria set in implementing rules under the citizenship law, namely the Citizenship Regulation and Directives, present a there is a particular obstacle to getting citizenship in the name of mother. These will now need to be amended as per the Supreme Court ruling.. It is a matter which needs to be addressed soon for a more just, peaceful and prosperous society. The decision of the Supreme Court has therefore been welcomed by human rights community, civil rights activists and all.

This guest post was written by Laxman Lamichhane, who is an Advocate in Nepal. He holds an LLM in International Human Rights and Refugee Law from Tribhuvan University, Kathmandu, Nepal.

Stateless people in the Netherlands deserve better

To hold no nationality at all, have no passport and enjoy no right to vote anywhere: that is something special. But not unheard of. Worldwide, over 10 million people are stateless and there are also cases here in the Netherlands. For more than fifty years, the Netherlands has also recognised statelessness as something special and stateless people as having special needs. The UN Convention relating to the Status of Stateless Persons (from 1954) entered into force for the Netherlands in 1962 and this instrument sets out the rights to be enjoyed by stateless people. But just last week, an important Dutch advisory body concluded that “there is no proper instrument to establish statelessness in the Netherlands, which means that often cases of statelessness are left undetermined”. According to the Netherlands Advisory Committee on Migration Affairs (Advisory Committee), this must change because statelessness is something special. Their report, “No country of one’s own” contains a number of concrete recommendations that warrant our attention.

There are different ways in which a person can end up stateless. My first encounter with statelessness was with the little Omar (pseudonym). Omar was a healthy baby with two loving parents. But he faced one considerable disadvantage, right from the start: he had no nationality. He could not acquire his mother’s nationality because she was from a country where women do not enjoy an independent right to pass nationality to their children (still a problem in more than 25 countries around the world today). Nor could he get his father’s Dutch (!) nationality, because his parents were not married. His father needed to recognize his paternal link with Omar before the birth in order to automatically confer his nationality – but he didn’t know that.

Omar is not alone. Of the 2005 people who are registered as stateless in the Dutch Municipal Basic Administration (GBA) a surprising 1400 were actually born here in the Netherlands. While the nationality of these individuals is often not a purely Dutch issue, we are still forced to conclude that the Netherlands is contributing to the creation of statelessness. The Netherlands has a safeguard in its nationality law according to which children like Omar can opt for Dutch nationality after three years. However, in practice, the Advisory Committee has pointed out a number of problems in the implementation of this policy. A particularly troublesome issue is the condition that Dutch law stipulates for the exercise of this right of option, namely that the child is lawfully resident – a requirement that is, quite simple, in violation of the Netherlands’ international obligations (1961 UN Convention on the Reduction of Statelessness). Thanks to this requirement, many children are unable to exercise their right to a nationality. There are currently 85 stateless children registered in the GBA who were born here and are now four years old or more, but who cannot opt for Dutch nationality because they do not have a residence permit. The Netherlands is failing these children. This is why the Advisory Committee report urges to “drop the condition of lawful stay for the right of option for children born in the Netherlands”.

For many people, the first encounter with statelessness is through the story of Victor Navorski, the character played by Tom Hanks in “The Terminal”. As creatively demonstrated in this film, some stateless migrants find themselves stuck in limbo. In the film, limbo has a physical manifestation: Victor is trapped at the airport, he cannot leave through the exit doors because he has no permission to enter the country, but he also cannot board a plane to leave and go elsewhere because he does not have a valid passport. In the Netherlands, statelessness is also not a ground for a residence permit, but there is also no other country to which a stateless person can return. This can mean that a stateless person spends a long time trapped in immigration detention or is faced with the daily struggle of survival as an irregular migration in the Netherlands. This situation is not in anyone’s interest and requires a humane and practical solution. The Advisory Committee has therefore recommended that the Netherlands establish a procedure for determining whether a person is stateless and the grant of residence on that basis.

The Advisory Committee’s report demonstrates very clearly how the Netherlands can make just a few small policy adjustments to bring real change to a small group of people. It will also help to generate more understanding for stateless people. As a stateless woman once explained in an interview to UNHCR: “When I tell people that I am stateless, what I see in their faces is shock, ignorance and mistrust. Each time you have to explain. It’s as if you have to prove your right to exist!” It is vital to fight against this ignorance. Statelessness is something special, but a stateless person is also a person.

This blog is an English translation of a similar piece that was published on the public comments page of Dutch newspaper Trouw on Thursday 12 December 2013.

Dr Laura van Waas, Senior Researcher and Manager, Statelessness Programme

GUEST POST: Between Ballot Papers and Birth Certificates: Cambodia’s Vietnamese Minority still Looking for its Place in Society

Cambodia’s national parliamentary election in July 2013 saw much debate about the place of the country’s ethnic Vietnamese minority. Whilst the contemporary politicized discourse focuses primarily on who should have a right to vote, few address the underlying question of the social and legal status of this minority group in Cambodia. The ethnic Vietnamese in Cambodia is one of, if not the largest, minority group in the country. Despite this, the ethnic Vietnamese population in Cambodia remains understudied. Whilst many ethnic Vietnamese have Cambodian identification documents and have successfully integrated into society, others continue to live at the margins of society and face difficulties substantiating their legal status in Cambodia.

 

Any discussion about this group needs to start with a proper differentiation, as "The Vietnamese" in Cambodia are not comprised of one single group, but comprise multifaceted and diverse sub-groups of individuals. Such sub-groups include Cambodian citizens of Vietnamese origin; ethnic Vietnamese in mixed marriages with Khmer spouses; long-term residents of Cambodia (some of whom have resided in Cambodia during or before French colonial times); and more recent immigrants seeking economic opportunities.

 

One of the most vulnerable groups is Cambodia’s long-term ethnic Vietnamese minority. In an attempt to shed light into the circumstances of this specific group, a recent report – “A Boat Without Anchors” – assessed the legal status of a focal group from Kampong Chhnang province around the Tonle Sap Lake. The report explores the status of the focal group under the applicable Cambodian and Vietnamese nationality laws, examines available documentation among the group and considers how the national authorities of Cambodia and Vietnam view and treat the group under the operation of their respective laws.

 

Some communities belonging to this focal group have resided for many generations in Cambodia, and many individuals have acquired Cambodian citizenship under previous or current nationality laws. However, the minority group has frequently suffered under the often-times contentious bilateral relationship between Cambodia and Vietnam, and discrimination and exclusion  in Cambodia has complicated their integration into society. At its extreme, the group suffered under the genocidal campaign of the Khmer Rouge regime, aimed at exterminating the group from Cambodia.  For this, accused persons at the Khmer Rouge Tribunal have been charged with the crime of genocide against the Vietnamese. For survivors who resided in Cambodia for generations, survival resulted from their deportation to Vietnam in 1975. Upon their return during the 1980s, most were treated as “immigrants” or “foreign residents”. As a consequence, many have neither proof of Cambodian nor Vietnamese nationality. These persons may in fact be stateless.

 

Without citizenship and other documentation, the specific ethnic Vietnamese in this research do not have access to many basic economic, political, and social rights. They face an array of legal, political, economic and social disadvantages, including difficulty accessing employment, education, health care, legal protection, limited freedom of movement, and an inability to open a bank account or own land. Few development activities have taken place in these communities. Expanding much needed services, in particular in the education and health sectors, to cover these and other communities would contribute to integrating them into Cambodian society and upholding their basic rights.

 

Importantly, the report found that these Vietnamese communities, by and large, have no effective access to birth registration. According to Cambodian law, birth registration is not linked to nationality and is available to all children born on Cambodian territory.  The absence of birth registration documentation for children in the focal group communities creates barriers for obtaining other documents relevant to exercising future rights and entitlements such as admission to school and access to Cambodian nationality, in accordance with the Cambodian nationality law. In order to ensure that statelessness does not perpetuate through generations within the Vietnamese minority populations in Cambodia, there is a need to expand universal birth registration to the children of these communities. The commendable efforts undertaken in past years by the responsible entities under the Cambodian Ministry of Interior, often with support from UNICEF, should be continued and expanded, including awareness-raising among affected population and local authorities.

A careful balance needs to be struck, which respects the right of the Cambodia state to regulate immigration, and the rights of long-term residents in accordance with Cambodia’s national law and international human rights standards. To achieve this balance, authorities need to distinguish between individuals who have resided for many generations in Cambodia and more recent immigrants. Cambodian laws should apply equally to everybody – both mainstream Cambodians and members of the ethnic Vietnamese minority in Cambodia.  As rights and obligations go hand in hand, this can provide a more sustainable basis for integration.

 

 

Christoph Sperfeldt and Lyma Nguyen, authors of JRS Cambodia’s publication “A boat without anchors”

 

 

UNHCR Statelessness Research Award interviews... Amanda Cheong

In this series of blog posts, we will be asking the students honoured in this year's UNHCR Award for Statelessness Research about their experiences studying the phenomenon on statelessness and their research findings. Last in the series is Ms Amanda Cheong, whose B.A. Honours thesis entitled "Changing Conceptions of Citizenship Among Stateless Chinese-Bruneian Immigrants in Vancouver", written at the Department of Sociology at the University of British Columbia (Canada), was chosen by the Jury as the Best Research in the Undergraduate Category.

      1.       Could you summarise, in 2 or 3 sentences, what your research was about?

My project had two main goals:

     1)      To depict statelessness as an embodied, lived experience by providing a descriptive account of the material and emotional repercussions faced by stateless Chinese-Bruneians;

     2)      To demonstrate how Brunei’s and Canada’s citizenship policies differentially mediated the nature of stateless Chinese-Bruneian immigrants’ ideas of citizenship and their relationships to the state.

      2.       What first got you interested in the problem of statelessness?

It wasn’t until the springtime before the final year of my undergraduate degree when I discovered that my parents had grown up without citizenship in the country in which they were born.  They mentioned this fact offhandedly when we were shopping for snacks one evening in an Asian wholesale grocery store. I pressed them further and asked, “So if you didn’t have citizenship, what did your passport say under ‘nationality’?” My mother replied matter-of-factly, “Stateless.” This moment marked a paradigm shift in the way I understood citizenship, as I could no longer took for granted the assumption that everyone automatically legally belonged somewhere. Thus, my professional commitment to the issue of statelessness arose out of deeply personal origins.

      3.       Why did you choose this particular research topic?

Ever since I learned about my family’s stateless history, I became both surprised at how little research has been conducted on statelessness to date, and fascinated about its human, subjective dimensions. What is being stateless like on an everyday basis? How do stateless people make sense of ideas of national identity and belonging?

There had been no prior attempts to systematically document the lives of the stateless Chinese in Brunei. The struggles of this particular population have been so chronically ignored that many of my interview respondents themselves questioned why I decided to pick Chinese-Bruneians, out of all the different cases that exist.  So I decided to study this population to not only make an academic contribution to the body of literature on statelessness, but also to demonstrate that the worth of no individual—regardless of how marginalized, forgotten or invisible—should be discounted.

      4.       Could you briefly describe how you went about your research? E.g. did you base it on existing sources – and were they easy to find? Did you do fieldwork or interviews – and what was that like?

I conducted oral history interviews with formerly stateless Chinese-Bruneian immigrants living in the Greater Vancouver Area. It was a challenging but gratifying experience, and I hope that the respondents also got something out of sharing their lives and histories with me.

      5.       What was the greatest challenge you had to deal with in undertaking your research?

My biggest challenge was reconciling my multiple identities and biases as researcher, activist, and daughter of formerly stateless immigrants.

      6.       Could you briefly summarise your main findings or conclusions – or what you think is the most important outcome of your research?

I found that while Brunei’s racialized citizenship policies restricted its stateless population to a predominantly instrumental understanding of citizenship as related to material entitlements, Canada’s more inclusionary model fostered a greater orientation towards symbolic notions of freedom, democratic participation, and civic engagement.

In addition to initiating the research and documentation of this little-known population, I also shed light upon the importance of citizenship policies in influencing how individuals conceive of themselves as civic beings and contribute to the political life of a nation, and how such ideas have the potential to shift through the migration process.

      7.       Have you found it rewarding to research statelessness – why / why not?

Definitely, and I am determined to continue working in this newly emerging field. My goal as an aspiring sociologist is to give a human face to the global crisis of statelessness, and to use scholarly inquiry to effect change at both community and policy levels.

      8.       What tips would you give to students who are getting involved in statelessness research to help them? E.g. are there particular questions you think they should be looking at or methodological issues they should consider?

I don’t know if I have any tips to share, as I am still a student who is learning more about statelessness, and trying to equip myself with the theoretical and methodological tools to study populations who legally do not exist. One thing I would say is that it is important to remember that, at the end of the day, statelessness is a fundamentally human issue that affects the everyday lives of real individuals, and to approach your research with an open and compassionate mind.

**

I wish to acknowledge my mother and father, formerly stateless immigrants now living in Canada, who inspire me every single day with their strength and perseverance in the face of impossible adversity. 

Amanda's research interests concern collective action and rights claims among stateless peoples, as well as related issues of migration, race/ethnicity, and nation-building. In September 2012, she began a research and documentary film project with Voice of the Children (www.voc.org.my), a child rights legal advocacy organization in Malaysia. Through fieldwork in urban and rural contexts, she explored how racialized discourses surrounding Malaysian nationality contribute to the legal and social marginalization of undocumented and stateless children in Sabah. Amanda is now a PhD student in Sociology and Social Policy at Princeton University. She can be reached at archeong@princeton.edu.

UNHCR Statelessness Research Award interviews... Caroline McInerney

In this series of blog posts, we will be asking the students honoured in this year's UNHCR Award for Statelessness Research about their experiences studying the phenomenon on statelessness and their research findings. Second in the series is Caroline McInerney, whose graduate level paper entitled "Citizenship Laws of Madagascar: Future Challenges for a Developing Nation", University of Virginia School of Law in the United States, won Joint Best Research in the Graduate Category. 

      1.      Could you summarise, in 2 or 3 sentences, what your research was about?

My research focused on the citizenship laws of Madagascar, examining the ways in which specific provisions of the Nationality Code as well as systemic issues in the administration of the laws have created a growing problem of statelessness and access to citizenship in the country. Specifically, my researched looked at the extent to which those who are Muslim or of Indian/Pakistani decent, referred to as Karana, are disproportionately affected by this problem of access to citizenship. I attempted to characterize the impact not having Malagasy citizenship has on the daily lives of these individuals and offer solutions for reforming the citizenship system.

      2.      What first got you interested in the problem of statelessness?

During my undergraduate studies I became involved with the migrant farmworker population in the United States, tutoring English to immigrants from Latin America on diary farms in New York State. Observing first-hand the way issues of citizenship impacted these individuals and forced them to live in the shadows motivated me to pursue a legal degree. I wanted to better understand the laws that dictated citizenship and nationality determinations as well as different countries’ approaches to these problems. Within the field of citizenship and nationality, the problem of statelessness raises particular concerns because not only do these individuals not have legal status in their country of residence, but also they are not legally citizens of any country.

      3.      Why did you choose this particular research topic?

Because of the political turmoil Madagascar has been in since 2008 and the continued efforts to hold elections, I thought it was a unique time to research issues of citizenship in Madagascar. There have been concerted efforts to try and hold elections to restore legitimacy to the government, but I was very curious to understand who among the people in Madagascar actually had the right to vote in these elections. There are many families who have lived in Madagascar for four or five generations that are not able to naturalize as Malagasy citizens and thus will never be a part of the participatory democracy the country is working to create. I wanted to understand what was the cause of the issue of statelessness in the country and what impact lack of access to Malagasy citizenship had on individuals in their daily lives.

      4.      Could you briefly describe how you went about your research? E.g. did you base it on existing sources – and were they easy to find? Did you do fieldwork or interviews – and what was that like?

Statelessness in Madagascar was relatively under researched. Some sources have identified the issue, but there was a lack of research concerning the scope of the problem or the root causes. My research was driven in large part by the fieldwork I did in Madagascar as well as sources I was able to find that provided some background history of the Karana and Muslim communities in the country. Madagascar’s Nationality Code is rather complex and one focus of mine was to understand to what extent the text of the Code was the cause of the problem verses the administration of the system. I did a thorough analysis of the language in the Code breaking down the different pathways to citizenship and identifying possible gaps in protection. I coupled this with interviews I had in country that explained how the Code was implemented in practice. Madagascar has ratified several international conventions that deal with issues of access to citizenship, gender rights, children’s rights, and discrimination. I examined whether the Nationality Code in its text and in its operation adheres to these standards. My fieldwork helped me gain a better perspective of what impact not having citizenship has on individuals’ daily lives. I also observed first-hand how the different communities, Malagasy, Karana, and Muslim, intersect in Malagasy society. A better understanding of the racial and ethnic divides in the country allowed me to identify what barriers existed to reforming the citizenship system and some potential avenues for change.

      5.      What was the greatest challenge you had to deal with in undertaking your research?

Individuals facing issues of citizenship or statelessness are often unwillingly to speak openly about the problem. Sometimes those most impacted are purposefully hidden in the shadows for their own safety. Those who I did speak with in Madagascar were occasionally cautious of speaking candidly about the situation because they did not want to be the instigator of unrest or start conflict between the Karana, Muslim, and Malagasy communities. Moreover, there is no existing institutional structure within the country that is working with stateless individuals or looking at the issues of access to citizenship. My approach was to focus on accessing the communities most impacted by these issues, speaking with leaders in the Muslim and Karana communities.

      6.      Could you briefly summarise your main findings or conclusions – or what you think is the most important outcome of your research?

Statelessness as well as access to Malagasy citizenship is a significant problem in Madagascar. Many foreigners who have been in the country for generations are still waiting to be naturalized. The Karana, who are estimated to contribute close to one-third of the country’s GDP, are disproportionately affected by this problem. While some of these individuals have been able to acquire citizenship of another country, precluding them from accessing Malagasy citizenship is a problem from a development perspective. These indivdiuals may be less likely to invest in the country if their legal status in Madagascar is uncertain. As the country develops having Malagasy citizenship will become more important for accessing social services and participating in the democratic life of the country. Continuing to marginalize a significant portion of the population in Madagascar could lead to civil unrest. The government has the opportunity now to peacefully reform the citizenship system and build a strong foundation for a vibrant participatory democracy in the future. There are deep racial tensions underlying the issue of statlessness and access to citizenship, but Madagascar can start by amending the Nationality Code to more closely align with the international conventions it has ratified. The country can also do more to address institutional barriers to accessing citizenship and work to promote integration of the Muslim and Karana communities.

      7.      Have you found it rewarding to research statelessness – why / why not?

Researching statelessness is very rewarding because it focuses on helping individuals who are deprived one of the most basic human rights, the right to be a citizen of a country. It also gives a voice to people who may not be able to speak out on their own behalf because they have well founded fears for what might happen if they draw attention to themselves, their communities, and their status.

      8.      What tips would you give to students who are getting involved in statelessness research to help them? E.g. are there particular questions you think they should be looking at or methodological issues they should consider?

I think it important to understand the cultural and historical factors that may be contributing to the problem of statelessness. Being able to spend time in the field is helpful in this regard. Even informal conversations that take place while doing fieldwork, that may not directly deal with the problem of statelessness, are helpful in framing the issue. Also, be cognisant of what role you play in the conversation. Often your own gender, race, and ethnicity can change the shape of the conversation. Be aware of this and consider mechanisms for overcoming this while in the field. 


Caroline McInerney will complete her J.D. degree at the University of Virginia School of Law (UVA) in May of 2014. She graduated with honors from Cornell University, School of Industrial and Labor Relations in 2011. As an undergraduate, McInerney worked with the immigrant farmworker population in upstate New York teaching English. Through field research she also developed a domestic fair trade proposal to improve migrant conditions. Her research has focused on the intersection of immigration and labor issues as well as refugee rights. McInerney’s honors thesis at Cornell explored the impact of extraterritorial border enforcement on refugees. Working at the United Nations International Labour Organization in Geneva, she contributed to a book titled Making Migration a Development Factor: The Case of North and West Africa and coauthored the working paper, Youth Employment in Crisis. At UVA McInerney volunteers with the Migrant Farmworker Project and the Capital Area Immigrants’ Rights Coalition. She is the Submissions Review Editor for the Virginia Journal of International Law. She spent the summer of 2012 working with asylum applicants at Sanctuary for Families in New York City. Most recently McInerney conducted fieldwork in Madagascar studying the issue of statelessness among the Muslim and Indo-Pakistani populations.