Previous 46 / 46 Next

44 RAMADAN v. MALTA JUDGMENT – SEPARATE OPINION STATEMENT OF DISSENT BY JUDGE ZUPANČIČ To my regret I cannot agree with the majority that there has been no violation of Article 8 of the Convention.

Select target paragraph3

● ● ●

Ramadan v. Malta

Documents

Author: European Court of Human Rights

Document number: 76136/12

Preview

Description: An Egyptian national, who resided in Malta and acquired Maltese nationality through marriage, was granted authorisation to renounce his Egyptian nationality as he could not hold dual nationality. He was deprived of his Maltese nationality years later, following a decision that found that he had obtained his Maltese nationality through fraud. The Court found that while in certain circumstances an arbitrary denial or loss of nationality could violate Article 8, in this case there was no violation, with the Court noting the lack of adverse impact on the applicant as a consequence of the revocation.

Type of resource

Legal instruments / Jurisprudence

Source

Other

Region

Europe

Country

Egypt
Malta

Theme

Human Rights Enjoyment by Stateless People
Nationality Deprivation

Framework

Regional Frameworks

Date published: Jun 21, 2016

Source URL: Direct Link

Primary Documents

CASE%20OF%20RAMADAN%20v.%20MALTA_0.pdf
English
Download View

StatelessHub Library

Select target paragraph3

Ramadan v. Malta

Primary Documents

Notifications