Jules Lepoutre nationality impossible, whether voluntary or involuntary. In the United Kingdom, voluntary loss appeared in the 1870 Naturalisation Act (see above, 2.1.), while involuntary loss of nationality only developed in the early 20th century, with the progress of the ‘subjective’ approach. Two modes of loss should, in effect, be distinguished: ‘objective’ and ‘subjective’ loss. The objective loss of nationality, on the one hand, is based on an objective observation by the state of the individual’s situation: permanent emigration, acquisition of foreign nationality, change in the family situation, and error or fraud in the acquisition process. These situations can all lead to involuntary loss of nationality, but the distinctive factor here is that the state is only drawing conclusions from either the lack of a genuine link with its citizen, or the constitution of a new genuine link with a foreign state. The subjective loss of nationality, on the other hand is enshrined in the loyalty and the merit of the citizen, without any evaluation of the genuine link between the state and the individual. This mode of loss is more recent when considering the long history of nationality. It emerged in the early 20 th century, appearing especially during the First World War, when the United Kingdom29 and France30 enacted new legislation to massively revoke or cancel the British or French naturalisation of ‘enemy subjects,’ mainly from Germany. These laws created the lasting impression that nationality is not only a question of having a genuine link with the state, but also a matter of loyalty and merit. These two modes – objective and subjective – continue to co-exist in all the current legal systems of Member States. 3.1.2. Recent Trend: Nationality Revocation in case of Terrorism The topic of involuntary loss of nationality has recently given rise to a heated debate. In the past few years, 13 Member States have made substantial changes in their legislation. 31 These reforms will be discussed below (see 3.2. ff.), it is nevertheless interesting to put the emphasis here on the major trend which is the extension of nationality revocation to cases of terrorism-related activities, which is a measure that targets both homegrown terrorists, and foreign fighters associated with terrorist groups. Eight Member States have extended or introduced legislation about nationality revocation to (allegedly) better fight terrorism; the United Kingdom, Germany and France are three relevant instances that can be further developed to highlight the characteristics of this trend. Overview Many countries are changing their laws, or adopting new provisions, to facilitate nationality deprivation for individuals related to terrorist activities. Member States are primarily reacting to the rise and collapse of ISIS, and trying to prevent their nationals from returning to European soil by depriving them of their nationality – using revocation as a modern form of exile or banishment.32 This trend appeared in the 2010s and is now rising rapidly. Austria implemented a legislative reform in 2015, authorising the government to deprive citizenship from “a citizen who actively and voluntarily participates in an organised armed group fighting abroad in situations of armed conflict.”33 This provision was first used in 2017 to revoke the nationality of an Austrian who also possessed Turkish nationality and had already been sentenced to three years of prison 29 Weil, P., and N. Handler. (2018). “Revocation of Citizenship and Rule of Law: How Judicial Review Defeated Britain’s First Denaturalization Regime.” Law and History Review, 36(2), 295-354. 30 Weil, P. (2008). How to Be French. Nationality in the Making since 1789. Durham: Duke University Press, 240-241. 31 Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, Denmark, Finland, Germany, Italy, Lithuania, the Netherlands, Slovakia, Spain, and the United Kingdom. 32 Macklin, A., Bauböck, R. (eds.) (2015). The Return of Banishment: Do the New Denationalisation Policies Weaken Citizenship? EUI RSCAS, 2015/14, EUDO Citizenship Observatory [GLOBALCIT]. 33 Van Waas, L. (2016). “Foreign Fighters and the Deprivation of Nationality: National Practices and International Law Implications.” In Foreign Fighters under International Law and Beyond, edited by A. de Guttry, F. Capone and C. Paulussen, 469-487. The Hague: T.M.C. Asser Press and Springer. See also Valchars, G. (11 December 2014). “Bill to Denationalise Austrians Fighting in Armed Conflicts Passed by Parliament.” Globalcit News. Retrieved from here. 8 Robert Schuman Centre for Advanced Studies Working Papers