728
THE AMERICAN JOURNAL OF INTERNATIONAL LAW
[Vol. 105:694
non-Jews,225 as has CERD about a Qatari naturalization measure favoring nationals of
Arab states.226 Since affinity preferences are discriminatory in the sense that they favor nationals of some states over others, they may be headed for a collision with nondiscrimination norms.
Administrative discretion, processing issues, and application fees. States are being challenged
for procedural irregularities in their naturalization regimes, especially when they raise
issues of potential discrimination. CERD has taken Switzerland to task for its naturalization policies as being “too protracted and selective,”227 and Croatia for “excessive delays”
in processing the citizenship applications of non-Croat ethnics.228 The Human Rights
Committee condemned the Latvia naturalization regime as “calculated to delay the naturalization process for many years.”229 The Dominican Republic has been condemned for
a birth registration scheme that, in practice, deprives residents of Haitian origin from
securing citizenship due them under Dominican law.230 Other countries cited for administrative barriers to citizenship have included Macedonia231 and the United States.232
Among African states, naturalization, while available in principle, may “in practice . . . be
almost impossible to obtain.”233
As two leading legal scholars on citizenship recommend, human rights standards should
guarantee procedural minimum standards, which include reasonably low fees that do not
create financial deterrents for applicants, clearly stated requirements that do not allow for
225
Committee on Economic, Social & Cultural Rights, Report on the Thirtieth and Thirty-first Sessions, May
5–23, Nov. 10 –28, 2003, Concluding Observations: Israel, para. 261, UN Doc. E/2004/22 (Mar. 8, 2004).
226
CERD, Concluding Observations: Qatar, para. 11, UN Doc. CERD/C/60/CO/11 (May 21, 2002).
227
CERD, Annual Report: Czech Republic, para. 124, UN Doc. A/53/18, (Sept. 10, 1998); see also CERD,
Concluding Observations: Croatia, para. 316, UN Doc. A/53/18 (Sept. 10, 1998) (highlighting “delays in processing of applications for citizenship”).
228
CERD, Concluding Observations: Croatia, para. 497, UN Doc. A/48/18 (Sept. 15, 1993); CERD, Concluding Observations: Croatia, para. 316, UN Doc. A/53/18 (Sept. 10, 1998); see also CERD, Concluding Observations: Croatia, para. 17, UN Doc. CERD/C/HRV/CO/8 (Mar. 24, 2009) (calling for Croatia to “remove any
administrative and other obstacles and assist persons whose access to obligatory documentation is limited, such as
persons of Roma, Serb and Bosniak origin”).
229
Human Rights Committee, Concluding Observations: Latvia, para. 350, UN Doc. A/50/40, vol. I (Oct. 3,
1995). CERD likewise called on Latvia to “streamline the process of naturalization.” CERD, Concluding Observations: Latvia, para. 404, UN Doc. A/54/18 (Sept. 29, 1999).
230
See Girls Yean v. Dominican Republic, Judgment, Inter-Am. Ct. H.R., para. 171 (Sept. 8, 2005). The practice was found discriminatory, inconsistent with Article 20 of the American Convention of Human Rights, Nov.
22, 1969, 1144 UNTS 123, which provides that individuals should not be arbitrarily deprived of nationality. See
Girls Yean, para. 174; see also Gerald L. Neuman, The Resilience of Nationality, 101 ASIL PROC. 97, 98 (2007) (“a
remarkable example of international constraint on a state’s power to determine who its nationals are”); Committee
on the Rights of the Child, Concluding Observations: Nepal, paras. 42– 44, UN Doc. CRC/C/15/Add.261 (Sept.
21, 2005) (criticizing birth registration system having the effect of discriminating against individuals born to single
mothers).
231
Committee on Economic, Social & Cultural Rights, Concluding Observations: Macedonia, para. 32, UN
Doc. E/C.12/MKD/CO/1 ( Jan. 15, 2008) (calling for removal of “administrative obstacles” to securing of citizenship by Roma).
232
Office of the High Commissioner on Human Rights, Report of the Special Rapporteur on Contemporary
Forms of Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance, Addendum: Mission to the United
States of America, para. 70, UN Doc. A/HRC/11/36/Add.3 (Apr. 28, 2009) (expressing “serious concern” regarding “long delay in the processing of citizenship applications” following the September 11 attacks).
233
MANDBY, STRUGGLES FOR CITIZENSHIP IN AFRICA, supra note 5, at 141.
This content downloaded from
82.196.111.31 on Thu, 07 Oct 2021 15:20:30 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms