Staatsburgerschap en Nederlanderschap in Nederlands-Indië in de negentiende eeuw

The development of political citizenship in the Dutch East-Indies in the nineteenth century This article aims to analyze the political inequality between Dutch subjects in the Dutch East-Indies and the Netherlands based on developments in nineteenth century national citizenship debates and legislation. It argues that the juridization of the idea of political citizenship by J.R. Thorbecke in the 1840s and 1850s, led to the exclusion of the indigenous colonial population on the basis of descent (ius sanguinis). A close inspection of this principle shows how it was legitimized and implemented for the colonial territories on the basis of a ‘Dutch and European civilization criterion’ under which a series of other criteria – such as religion, skin color, education – could be used for political, cultural and economic exclusion. The ‘colonial differences’ that were gradually enshrined in legislation surrounding political citizenship in the nineteenth century would create a new layer of colonial hierarchy in the Dutch East-Indies.

Birthright Citizenship

Birthright citizenship refers to the legal status of citizenship when acquired through birth to a citizen parent (ius sanguinis) or birth in the territory of a state (ius soli). This is how most people acquire citizenship, often unconditionally and automatically at birth. A minority across the globe acquire citizenship through naturalization. Historically ius soli predominated from the Early Modern period, when those born in the sovereign’s territory automatically became their subjects. Ius sanguinis arose following the French Revolution, reflecting the free citizen father’s right to pass citizenship on to his child. Both forms spread globally through imitation and colonization. All states now award citizenship by birth; most have a combination of the two forms. But the strength of provisions varies. All states have substantial ius sanguinis provision; fewer have strong ius soli. In both, acquisition may depend on certain restrictive conditions related to parental birthplace or residence, marital status, gender, religion, ethnicity, or race. Until recently citizenship has been studied more by lawyers than political scientists, and birthright citizenship has received less attention than naturalization. Studies have tended to focus on the citizenship laws and policies of a limited number of states, mainly in the Global North. Only recently have studies covering a greater number and diversity of countries begun to emerge. Comparative scholars have sought to identify and explain different patterns of birthright citizenship provision related to the strength of ius soli and ius sanguinis. These have been interpreted variously as alternative models reflecting different national conceptions of citizenship, as determined by civil or common law traditions, or as dependent on histories of emigration, immigration, and colonization. Contemporary changes have been understood as a function of domestic electoral politics, developments in international law, norm diffusion among states, or a range of contingent contextual factors. Scholars dispute whether diversity of citizenship regimes has been succeeded by convergence. More complex typologies and indices, including birthright citizenship, have emerged, along with increasing availability of data on citizenship around the world. The justification of birthright citizenship has been much debated. Birthright citizenship has been seen as an appropriate way of allocating democratic membership, providing intergenerational continuity of citizenry, reducing the incidence of statelessness, and integrating immigrants. But ius sanguinis has often been criticized as exclusive and illiberal. It is debated whether ius soli is better justified, or if all forms of birthright citizenship should be seen as conveying arbitrary privilege and contributing to global inequality.

O Tratado de Saint-Germain-en-Laye e os efeitos do instituto da "opção" sobre a condição jurídica dos descendentes de cidadãos austríacos trentino-tirolêses

O processo de nacionalização dos habitantes de territórios anexados pela Itália antes pertencentes ao Império austro-húngaro tem como premissa o instituto da “opção”, que se encontra regulamentado nos artigos 70 a 82 do Tratado de Saint-Germain-en-Laye, um dos documentos que encerrou a Primeira Guerra Mundial. Neste, subsistia a necessidade de realização – no prazo de um ano –, de manifestação explícita em favor da manutenção da nacionalidade austríaca para os que residiam nos territórios anexados e possuíam a “pertinenza/heimatrecht” nos termos do Tratado, e na possibilidade de opção pela nacionalidade italiana, aos que haviam emigrado de tais territórios ainda como austríacos. O presente estudo, através dos métodos de análise empírica e de historiografia jurídica e de técnicas de pesquisa sobretudo bibliográficas, examinará aspectos da condição jurídica dos descendentes de emigrantes originários de tais territórios e que não realizaram a “opção”, assim como as consequências jurídicas de sua ausência, em particular a isenção de responsabilidade internacional do Estado italiano e do nascente Estado republicano austríaco no que concerne a tais indivíduos. Conclui-se que os descendentes destes emigrados foram privados do reconhecimento de ambas as nacionalidades através do critério do ius sanguinis, permanecendo na condição jurídica de estrangeiros em relação a ambos os países até a emanação da Lei italiana n. 379, de 2000. O trabalho assim contribui para a compreensão de institutos de interesse (e pouco debatidos) para grande parcela da população brasileira, visto que a colonização trentino-tirolesa foi expressiva no país.

Tugas HTN ASMA ANDRIA JAYA

Kewarganegaraan adalah sebuah bentuk keanggotaan dalam sosial politik tertentu atau secara khusus yaitu negara, dengan membawa hak untuk berpartisipasi dalam kegiatan politik tersebut. Istilah kewarganegaraan memiliki arti keanggotaan yang menunjukkan hubungan antara megara dan warga negara. Kewarganegaraan dapat juga diartikan dengan segala jenis hubungan suatu negara yang dapat mengakibatkan adanya kewajiban negara untuk melindungi orang yang bersangkutan.Asas kewarganegaraan ada 2 (dua), yaitu: asas kelahiran atau ius soli dan asas keturunan atau ius sanguinis. Selain asas-asas tersebut ada juga asas campuran, asas campuran adalah asas gabungan antara kelahiran atau ius soli dan asas keturunan atau ius sanguinis.Dalam status kewarganegaraan seseorang terjadi apabila asas kewarganegaraan diterapkan dengan tegas dalam suatu negara, dapat mengakibatkan status kewarganegaraan seseorang menjadi: apatride, bipatride, dan multipatride.Montesquieu juga menyatakan agar tidak terjadi penyalahgunaan kekuasaan, ketiga cabang kekuasaan tersebut tidak boleh bertumpu pada satu organ, tetapi harus dipisahkan organ yang satu dengan organ yang lainnya. Menurut Bagir Manan wewenang adalah kekuasaan yang diberikan atau didapat berdasarkan hukum yang ekuivalen dengan authority. Dengan demikian, kekuasaan dapat diabatasi sesuai dengan fungsi dan dapat dikontrol baik secara internal oleh lembaga-lembaga lain yang sederajat, maupun secara eksternal oleh rakyat sebagai konstituen nyata yang diwakili oleh lembaga-lembaga negara.

kewenangan MK_171 PUTRI HASRI WAHYUNI S

Kewarganegaraan seseorang diperoleh berdasarkan tempat kelahiran atau Ius Soli dan kewarganegaraan yang diperoleh berdasarkan hubungan darah atau Ius Sanguinis. Perbedaan asas Ius Soli dan Ius Sanguinis mengakibatkan munculnya kewarganegaraan ganda. Sejumlah negara, seperti Amerika Serikat, Australia, Kanada, Selandia Baru, Swiss, Turki, Jamaika menganut kewarganegaraan ganda. Sampai saat ini, setidaknya terdapat 44 negara yang menerapkan kewarganegaraan ganda.

Citizenship with a price tag: the law and ethics of investor citizenship programmes

While a significant amount of attention has been paid in scholarly work to the modes of acquisition of citizenship at birth, either through territorial attachments (ius soli) or descent (ius sanguinis), far less consideration has been given to the acquisition of citizenship after birth (ius nexi). Even if the notion of ius nexi encapsulates a variety of modes for the acquisition of citizenship through connection to the host state, the one that has recently gained salience in the context of the preferential naturalisation of investors is that of ius pecuniae – i.e. citizenship acquisition driven by money. Although setting a price tag on membership in a community is intuitively disquieting, there has hitherto been little discussion as to why this might be the case. The primary goal of this article is to set out three sets of criteria against which the different mechanisms of preferential naturalisation of investors can be evaluated. Deploying a critique of the notion of ‘genuine ties’, we first examine whether the economic utility of the investment to the state can suffice to override some or all other criteria for naturalisation. Then, we look at the preferential treatment of investors in the context of merit-based naturalisation. Finally, we examine how the investment-based ius pecuniae affects the relationship between the members of the polity and naturalised investors and between naturalised investors and other applicants subject to ordinary naturalisation. The analysis suggests that, even though all these criteria have pitfalls, the principle that citizenship should instantiate a claim of equality best explains why we are uncomfortable with the idea ofselling citizenship.

OS DIREITOS HUMANOS DOS "SEM PATRIA"

O trabalho introduz o conceito de apatridia para designar as pessoas as quais foram privadas do seu direito a nacionalidade por motivos políticos, burocráticos, degênero ou religião, abordando exemplos em cada tópico, e com um apenso para falar dos casos mais relevantes ocorridos no Brasil, como o Caso Brasileirinhos, causado devido à Emenda Constitucional 54/07, e o caso da apátrida Maha Mamo. O projeto também difere os apátridas, refugiados e deslocados internos, além de apresentar as convenções as quais regulam cada uma dessas categorias. A apatridia é um tema que, nos últimos anos, começou a ter mais relevância em um cenário internacional - principalmente com a repercussão da situação do povo Rohingyas, comunidade muçulmana apátrida de Myanmar - midiático e até mesmo no meio artístico, com produções cinematográficas sobre o assunto, como por exemplo o filme “O Terminal” e obras literárias. Nos últimos cem (100) anos, diversos fatores, em diferentes períodos de tempo, culminaram na proliferação de cidadãos apátridas, ou seja, estavam nascendo pessoas apátridas, todavia, outras se tornaram apátridas devido a algum conflito. Conflito este que pode ter sido a Primeira Guerra Mundial, Segunda Guerra Mundial, a dissolução da União das Repúblicas Socialistas Soviéticas (URSS), Guerra do Irã e do Iraque. É colocada em discussão também como seria possível evitar a configuração da situação de apatridia para muitas pessoas e a falha do critério ius sanguini na atribuição da nacionalidade. Já foi visto por diversas vezes e ainda ocorrem brechas as quais, na época em que foi instaurado o ius sanguinis poderiam não ser tão significativas, mas atualmente, com a globalização e o aumento populacional, tem sido cada vez maior a dificuldade em elaborar leis em cada país as quais prevejam possibilidades para que não ocorra o nascimento de mais um apátrida. O trabalho mostra que apatridia, fenômeno que atinge 12 milhões de pessoas ao redor do mundo, não se resume somente a não ter nenhum vínculo político jurídico que una o indivíduo a um Estado-Membro da Comunidade Internacional. É reconhecer que, sem a nacionalidade, o ser humano tem negado o seu direito a saúde, a educação, liberdade de ir e vir a territórios estrangeiros, possibilidade de trabalhar, de prestar queixa contra roubo, estupro ou quaisquer que seja a razão, de casar-se ou registrar os filhos, adquirir propriedades. Podem ter dificuldade em ser hospitalizados e não conseguir abrir uma conta bancária ou receber uma pensão. Até seus nomes podem não ser reconhecidos. Aos olhos da lei, não existem. Desse modo, o objetivo é, primeiramente, (i) reconhecer a apatridia como um problema mundial que abrange diversas categorias (ii) observar os critérios que podem vir a gerar a apatridia (iii) verificar quais são as políticas públicas que o Brasil possui nesse quesito.

Implikasi Kewarganegaraan Ganda bagi Warga Negara Indonesia

Dalam Pasal 28D ayat (4) UUD 1945, dengan tegas dinyatakan bahwa, Setiap orang berhak atas status kewarganegaraan”. Pada ketentuan tersebut tidak dinyatakan bahwa setiap orang juga berhak atas satu atau dua kewarganegaraan. Hal yang penting bagi UUD 1945 adalah tidak boleh terjadi keadaan apatride, sedangkan kemungkinan terjadinya bipatride, tidak diharuskan dan juga tidak dilarang. Hal yang penting bagi negara ialah bahwa warga negaranya itu memenuhi hak dan kewajiban sebagai warga negara. Sehingga jelas dan tegas hak dan kewajiban setiap warga negara dalam UUD 1945, hal inilah yang membedakan dengan orang asing. Keberadaan penelitian ini dimaksudkan untuk mencari jawaban terhadap permasalahan: (a) Apakah asas kewarganegaraan yang dianut oleh Negara Indonesia? (b) Bagaimana implikasi kewarganegaraan ganda bagi warga Negara Indonesia?. Untuk menemukan jawaban permasalahan tersebut ditempuh melalui metode Penelitian Hukum Normatif Empiris, yaitu penelitian yang memperhatikan bahwa hukum bekerja pada segi kaidah/norma/normwissenschaft yaitu perundang-undangan yang berkaitan dengan kewarganegaraan Republik Indonesia, yang tidak terlepas dari unsur sosial/empiris. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa: (1) Indonesia menganut asas kewarganegaraan, yaitu Ius soli, ius sanguinis, asas kewarganegaraan tunggal dan asas kewarganegaraan rangkap terbatas. (2) Hak dan kewajiban warga negara tercantum dalam UUD 1945, hal tersebut menimbulkan implikasi bahwa warga negara Indonesia yang memiliki status kewarganegaraan ganda juga mempunyai hak, kewajiban dan partisipasi dalam negara yang sama dengan warga negara asli Indonesia, asalkan mereka ketika berusia 18 tahun harus memilih kewarganegaraan Indonesia.