2019 Statelessness & Citizenship Review 1(1) of the latter. Of the 11 remaining interviewees, two were unable to comment because they had no experience to reflect upon, suggesting the presence of a lack of self-entitlement to a life beyond the estate. The remaining nine interviewees explicitly stated that their community had achieved equality with the majority population, with a belief that Sri Lankans were now united provided as the leading reason for this response. Finally, when asked about the foremost challenge confronting the Up-Country Tamil population, and what interviewees believed could be done to overcome said challenge, the nexus of poverty, low incomes and a lack of job opportunities was the most commonly cited challenge highlighted among those who were able to respond (14/29). Securing employment other than that provided by the estate and increased government support for the Up-Country Tamil community alongside increased parliamentary representation were the most common responses provided as to how this challenge may be overcome. DISCUSSION Based on the findings presented above, it can be postulated that access and entitlement to healthcare, education and employment among Sri Lanka’s previously stateless Up-Country Tamil population has improved as a result of the 2003 grant of citizenship. Though not everyone consulted shared these views, the majority of questionnaire survey respondents and interviewees have reported a general improvement in access and entitlement with respect to these three indicators. In contrast, 50.7 per cent of all those consulted indicated that access and entitlement to political participation has not improved in the wake of citizenship, yet this makes for a non-negligible 49.2 per cent of respondents and interviewees who believe it has. Evidently, the acquisition of citizenship has brought with it substantive benefit, but when the above findings are disaggregated it is made apparent that not all of those consulted have an equal share in these benefits. When accounting for the responses of the urban versus rural population, it is rural respondents and interviewees who are overrepresented in reporting a lack of improvement in access and entitlement following the 2003 grant of citizenship. For instance, among the 23 survey respondents who indicated that access to government schools outside the estate had not improved since 2003, 21 are rurally located, of whom 18 are from Dickoya. Further, more than half of the survey respondents who indicated that access to formal employment outside the estate had not improved are again rural, with seven of 10 rural interviewees supporting this claim by either stating that no such opportunity exists, or that the prohibitive cost of transport prevents them from pursuing such opportunities. Of the 47 survey respondents who indicated that the ability to participate in the political process had not improved, 29 are rurally based in addition to a further nine out of 10 rural interviewees who for one reason or another are alienated from the political process. As well, it is rural respondents that comprise the majority of those who see the acquisition of citizenship as non-beneficial and perceive themselves not as the equals of the majority population. For these reasons, and despite the general improvement in access and entitlement to each indicator under investigation, it can be said that there exists a rural rights deficit in the Up-Country. Beyond the urban-rural divide, analysis of the above findings reveals three more findings, the first of which is a self-perceived non-entitlement to life outside 28