Colonial Legacies in Syrian Nationality Law having the opportunity to apply for citizenship under the decree. 221 Moreover, the Maktoumeen remain stateless and the Syrian regime has made no call to resolve their situation. Overall, the 1961 census and the 2011 decree thus illustrate how states can manipulate nationality rules for political purposes. By stripping Kurds of their citizenship, the Syrian regime rendered their presence unlawful and made them feel like they do not ‘belong’. Yet, Kurds have nowhere to seek refuge because the Anglo–French alliance broke their initial commitment to create a Kurdish independent state, and deprived Kurds off their right to self-determination as a result. ARBITRARY DENATIONALISATION IN SYRIAN LEGISLATION Denationalisation procedures were originally theorised and practiced in the United Kingdom and France, to be later exported all over Europe. 222 They initially appeared in the 19th century and were used as a form of punishment towards citizens who were considered ‘unloyal’ or ‘dangerous’. Citizenship-stripping gradually disappeared because it was deemed incompatible with the nation-state system in which states reciprocally respected each other’s right to control their borders and populations, and therefore the right to expel foreigners in their territory under certain circumstances. 223 International law strictly prohibits deprivation of citizenship if it is arbitrary, unlawful, based on discriminatory grounds or when it leads to statelessness. 224 However, citizenship-stripping has recently reappeared in Europe in the last decade, within the context of antiterrorism measures and the issue of ‘foreign fighters’ wishing to return back home. 225 French colonial rule has introduced and significantly influenced Syrian legislation on de-nationalisation procedures. 226 Article 21 of the Syrian Nationality Law lists several grounds on which Syrians might be stripped off their nationality. 227 Those include ‘citizens who reside in a non-Arab country for more than three years and who do not respond to requests for a justification of their absence within three months, or provide an insufficient response’. 228 This provision does not define what constitutes sufficient justification or through which means it can be proven, leaving complete discretion to the Syrian authorities. It is a carte blanche for the stripping of Syrian nationality that can be strategically used against political opponents or against members of specific minorities, and there is no safeguard to which the individual can have recourse, such as the right of appeal. Article 21 has, effectively, being used for political purposes by the Syrian regime: in the 1960s and 1970s, President Hafez Al-Assad arbitrarily denationalised 221 Amit Sen, Lacking a Nationality, Some Refugees from Syria Face Acute Risks (Report, 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 UNHCR 8 January 2014) <https://www.unhcr.org/hk/en/3810-lacking-a-nationality-somerefugees-from-syria-face-acute-risks.html>. Mathew J Gibney, ‘Banishment and the Pre-History of Legitimate Expulsion Power’ (2019) 24(3) Citizenship Studies 277, 299. ibid. Syrian Nationality Law (n 2) art 21(g). Dana Burchardt and Rishi Gulati, ‘International Counter-Terrorism Regulation and Citizenship-Stripping Laws: Reinforcing Legal Exceptionalism’ (2018) 23(2) Journal of Conflict and Security Law 203. Thompson, Colonial Citizens (n 10). Syrian Nationality Law (n 2) art 21. ibid. 29